Subject: Re: v6 deagg Date: Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 01:48:48PM +0100 Quoting
Sander Steffann (san...@steffann.nl):
> > However, apparently there is no such process or intention available
> > from the RIR in question (RIPE), short of explicitly asking for that
> > specific prefix.
>
> So you asked t
RFC7349 is a nice summary of everything we¹re still missing wrt MPLS and
is relatively recent so should be close to up to date. In addition to the
MPLS shortcomings, it also touches on recent IGP updates:
>3.2.3.1. Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP)
>
> RFC 3630 [RFC3630] specifies a method of
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:07 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
> but then we considered that v6 allocations seem to be /32s, and the
> longest propagating route seems to be /48, leaving 16 bits with which
> the deaggregators can play. while in v4 it was /24s out of a /19 or
> /20, four or five bits.
>
> thi
Hi Mans,
> I'm working at one of those organisations who have a /48 and am announcing
> it into DFZ. We have a situation where I might have another site with
> separate connectivity to the DFZ (but there is internal networking)
> which would entitle me to another /48 according to RIR rules.
Corre
Subject: Re: v6 deagg Date: Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 10:42:03AM +0100 Quoting
Mikael Abrahamsson (swm...@swm.pp.se):
> From a technical point of view, I have little interest in my router
> handling the fact that an office at the other side of the planet
> shut down their router, and learning this vi
5 matches
Mail list logo
