Re: ISP customer assignments

In message , "Ricky Beam" writes: > On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:38:58 -0400, Bill Stewart > wrote: > > ... If you've got a VPN tunnel device, too often the remote > > end will want to contact you at some numerical IPv4 address and isn't > > smart enough to query DNS to get it. > > As I was told by

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 19:38:58 -0400, Bill Stewart wrote: ... If you've got a VPN tunnel device, too often the remote end will want to contact you at some numerical IPv4 address and isn't smart enough to query DNS to get it. As I was told by Cisco, that's a security "feature". Fixed VPN endpoi

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:15:39PM -0400, Roland Dobbins wrote: > > On Oct 20, 2009, at 8:41 PM, Karl Auer wrote: > > >In practice, changing stuff, especially globally, is not as simple > >as that. > > From : > > 'Some took it on themselves to convince the

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Oct 20, 2009, at 10:29 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: Remember there are lots of machines that renumber themselves several times a day as they move between work and home The problem isn't largely with the endpoints - it's with all the other devices/policies/etc. which overload the EID with inap

Re: ISP customer assignments

In message <1069dfd4-87a3-4e38-aebc-43c05c16d...@arbor.net>, Roland Dobbins wri tes: > On Oct 20, 2009, at 8:41 PM, Karl Auer wrote: > > > In practice, changing stuff, especially globally, is not as simple > > as that. > > From : > > 'Some took it on thems

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Oct 20, 2009, at 8:41 PM, Karl Auer wrote: In practice, changing stuff, especially globally, is not as simple as that. From : 'Some took it on themselves to convince the authors that the concept of network renumbering as a normal or frequent procedur

Re: ISP customer assignments

In message <1256085698.30246.109.ca...@karl>, Karl Auer writes: > > There is no need to say at XX:XX on DD/MM/ we will be switching > > prefixes. One can be much smarter about how you do it. > >=20 > > You can just introduce the new prefix. Add second address to the > > DNS. Do your manual

Re: ISP customer assignments

> There is no need to say at XX:XX on DD/MM/ we will be switching > prefixes. One can be much smarter about how you do it. > > You can just introduce the new prefix. Add second address to the > DNS. Do your manual fixes. Remove the old addresses from the DNS. > Stop using the old prefix wh

Re: ISP customer assignments

In message <18a5e7cb0910201638j7a24a10dwb8440a42f8f9c...@mail.gmail.com>, Bill Stewart writes: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Nathan Ward wrote: > > On 20/10/2009, at 3:02 PM, Bill Stewart wrote: > >> plus want the ability to take their address > >> space with them when they change ISPs (bec

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 7:07 PM, Nathan Ward wrote: > On 20/10/2009, at 3:02 PM, Bill Stewart wrote: >> plus want the ability to take their address >> space with them when they change ISPs (because there are too many >> devices and applications that insist on having hard-coded IP addresses >> inst

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 20/10/2009, at 3:10 PM, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 03:07:39PM +1300, Nathan Ward wrote: On 20/10/2009, at 3:02 PM, Bill Stewart wrote: plus want the ability to take their address space with them when they change ISPs (because there are too many devices an

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 03:07:39PM +1300, Nathan Ward wrote: > On 20/10/2009, at 3:02 PM, Bill Stewart wrote: > > >plus want the ability to take their address > >space with them when they change ISPs (because there are too many > >devices and applications that insist on having hard-coded IP addres

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 20/10/2009, at 3:02 PM, Bill Stewart wrote: plus want the ability to take their address space with them when they change ISPs (because there are too many devices and applications that insist on having hard-coded IP addresses instead of using DNS, and because DNS tends to get cached more often

Re: ISP customer assignments

If you've got an addressing system with enough bits that you don't have to start stealing them, it makes sense to pick some boundary length between our-problem : their-problem 128 bits is long enough, and changing protocols is nasty enough, that it should let you Never Have To Do It

Re: ISP customer assignments - and CIDR

On Oct 16, 2009, at 5:19 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: I've taught both. If you try to teach it in Decimal, Hex, or Octal, you're right, it's hard to teach CIDR and easy to teach classful. It really does not matter the representation as long as you divide your Address Pie with a Binary Knife.

Re: ISP customer assignments

I've taught both. If you try to teach it in Decimal, Hex, or Octal, you're right, it's hard to teach CIDR and easy to teach classful. If you teach it in binary, I have found that not to be an issue. Once you teach it in binary, it's fairly easy to move on to showing how octal and hex are ju

Re: ISP customer assignments

hem! I don't want an engineer who can't grasp basic binary math. -Original Message- From: Daniel Golding [mailto:dgold...@t1r.com] Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 3:51 PM To: Joe Abley Cc: NANOG Subject: Re: ISP customer assignments The big problem here is that C

RE: ISP customer assignments

--Original Message- > From: Daniel Golding [mailto:dgold...@t1r.com] > Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 3:51 PM > To: Joe Abley > Cc: NANOG > Subject: Re: ISP customer assignments > > > The big problem here is that CIDR is tough to teach, even to > engineering students. Thi

Re: ISP customer assignments

The big problem here is that CIDR is tough to teach, even to engineering students. This seems bizarre and counterintuitive, but its true. I know this because I've done it. Its really easy to teach classful addressing, on the other hand. Other problems include the issue that many of the fo

Re: ISP customer assignments

* Chris Adams > This brings up something else I'm trying to figure out. We're not a > huge ISP; I've got our /32 but I don't see us using more. We have two > main POPs, each with Internet links, plus a link between the two. Our > IPv4 allocations are larger than the minimum, so I split our IPv4

Re: ISP customer assignments

> This is a bit annoying though, yeah. But, I'm not sure I can think of a good > solution that doesn't involve us changing the routing system so that we can > handle a huge amount of intentional de-aggregates or something. Within the RIPE region we're currently discussing a document on IPv6 route

Re: ISP customer assignments

Nathan Ward wrote: On 16/10/2009, at 1:17 PM, Chris Adams wrote: Is there any good solution to this? I don't expect us to fill the /32 to justify expanding it (although I do see ARIN appears to have left space for up to a /29; I guess that's their sparse allocation policy?). Your justificati

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 8:17 PM, Chris Adams wrote: > With IPv6, we've got our single /32. From what I understand, > if I try to advertise a /33 from the smaller POP, many (most?) > will drop it (if my upstreams even take it). If I advertise the /32 > from both routers, when that link goes down,

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 16/10/2009, at 1:17 PM, Chris Adams wrote: Is there any good solution to this? I don't expect us to fill the /32 to justify expanding it (although I do see ARIN appears to have left space for up to a /29; I guess that's their sparse allocation policy?). Your justification is that you hav

Re: ISP customer assignments

Once upon a time, Michael Dillon said: > And only the largest ISPs will outgrow a /32 allocation. This brings up something else I'm trying to figure out. We're not a huge ISP; I've got our /32 but I don't see us using more. We have two main POPs, each with Internet links, plus a link between th

Re: ISP customer assignments

> Of course, with IPv4, you never assigned a large enough block to begin > with that would anticipate all growth, so routing additional blocks was > a lot easier than changing blocks, cleaner than secondary IPs > multiplying like crazy, etc., etc.  None of that would be an issue with > a single /64

Re: ISP customer assignments

I can't offer any knowledgeable advice about PPPoA/E. We have never used it ourselves. On 14/10/09 22:16 -0500, Frank Bulk wrote: So you're saying moving away from PPPoA/E and just going bridged? Frank -Original Message- From: Dan White [mailto:dwh...@olp.net] Ask Pannaway if they c

RE: ISP customer assignments

So you're saying moving away from PPPoA/E and just going bridged? Frank -Original Message- From: Dan White [mailto:dwh...@olp.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 9:15 AM To: Justin Shore Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: ISP customer assignments On 12/10/09 21:34 -0500, Justin

Re: ISP customer assignments

In message , Nathan Ward writes : > > On 14/10/2009, at 7:23 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: > > > DS-Lite is there for when the ISP runs out of IPv4 addresses to > > hand one to each customer. Many customers don't need a unique IPv4 > > address, these are the ones you switch to DS-Lite. Those that do

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 14/10/2009, at 7:23 PM, Mark Andrews wrote: DS-Lite is there for when the ISP runs out of IPv4 addresses to hand one to each customer. Many customers don't need a unique IPv4 address, these are the ones you switch to DS-Lite. Those that do require a unique IPv4 you leave on full dual stack

RE: ISP customer assignments

In a message written on Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 08:14:40PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: <..> > What about web-hosting type servers? Right now, I've got a group of > servers in a common IPv4 subnet (maybe a /26), with a /24 or two routed > to each server for hosted sites. What is the IPv6 equivalent?

Re: ISP customer assignments

In message , Nathan Ward writes: > Ok, I've decided to do this a different way to my usual ranting. > Instead of explaining the options over and over and hoping people can > make sense of the complexities of it, become experts, and make good > informed decisions, I've made a flow chart. Feel

Re: ISP customer assignments

Ok, I've decided to do this a different way to my usual ranting. Instead of explaining the options over and over and hoping people can make sense of the complexities of it, become experts, and make good informed decisions, I've made a flow chart. Feel free to ask about details and I can get

Re: ISP customer assignments

Chris Adams wrote: > I guess I'm missing something; what in section 3 is this referring to? > I can understand /64 or /126 (or maybe /124 if you were going to > delegate reverse DNS?), but why /112 and "16 bits for node identifiers" > on a point-to-point link? It falls on a 16 bit boundry and is t

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 14/10/2009, at 3:49 PM, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Nathan Ward said: On 14/10/2009, at 2:14 PM, Chris Adams wrote: What about web-hosting type servers? Right now, I've got a group of servers in a common IPv4 subnet (maybe a /26), with a /24 or two routed to each server for host

Re: ISP customer assignments

Once upon a time, Nathan Ward said: > On 14/10/2009, at 2:14 PM, Chris Adams wrote: > >What about web-hosting type servers? Right now, I've got a group of > >servers in a common IPv4 subnet (maybe a /26), with a /24 or two > >routed > >to each server for hosted sites. What is the IPv6 equivale

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 14/10/2009, at 2:14 PM, Chris Adams wrote: What about web-hosting type servers? Right now, I've got a group of servers in a common IPv4 subnet (maybe a /26), with a /24 or two routed to each server for hosted sites. What is the IPv6 equivalent? I can see a /64 for the common subnet, but

Re: ISP customer assignments

In message , "Ricky Beam" writes: > On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:33:03 -0400, Justin Shore > wrote: > > He didn't really give much of a reason for the /127s yet. I think it's > > coming up in a later session. I think it basically boiled down to > > whether or not the customer would actually use

RE: ISP customer assignments

ringent on an all router segment perhaps, but even then I shoot for /64s on anything that is not a PtP link ... /TJ -Original Message- From: Chris Adams [mailto:cmad...@hiwaay.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 9:15 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: ISP customer assignments Once u

Re: ISP customer assignments

In a message written on Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 08:14:40PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: > I would expect you just assign static addresses to servers. Are there > pros/cons to using /64 or something else there? If I'm statically > assigning IP (and DNS, etc. servers) info, why would I not just > config

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 09:33:03 -0400, Justin Shore wrote: He didn't really give much of a reason for the /127s yet. I think it's coming up in a later session. I think it basically boiled down to whether or not the customer would actually use anything bigger. I'll write back when we get in

Re: ISP customer assignments

Once upon a time, Leo Bicknell said: > 2) Colon's separate 16 bit chunks in IPv6. /112's allow ::1, >::2 to be your IP's. Yeah, this is what I forgot about. Makes sense now. Another (quite possibly dumb :-) ) few questions come to mind about IPv6 assignment: I would expect you jus

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Cord MacLeod wrote: > IPv4? What's the point of a /64 on a point to point link? I'm not clear IP Addressing uniformity and simplicity. Use of /127s for Point-to-Point links introduces addressing complexity that may be avoided in V6: the scarcity of I

Re: ISP customer assignments

In a message written on Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 06:26:20PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: >The author feels that if /64 cannot be used, /112, reserving the last >16 bits for node identifiers, has probably the least amount of >drawbacks (also see section 3). > > I guess I'm missing something;

Re: ISP customer assignments

While entirely possible, I actually view it going the other way. RFC 3627 points out some nice issues as far as DAD and anycast operation is concerned, but what I'd see (just my random opinion as I haven't bothered to write an RFC) is that it would make entirely much more sense to come up with a s

Re: ISP customer assignments

That was the point. :) Scott Matthew Petach wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Scott Morris > wrote: > > How many addresses do you like on point-to-point circuits? > > Scott > > > I allocate a /64, but currently I configure only a /127 subnet on the >

Re: ISP customer assignments

Chris Adams wrote: I guess I'm missing something; what in section 3 is this referring to? I can understand /64 or /126 (or maybe /124 if you were going to delegate reverse DNS?), but why /112 and "16 bits for node identifiers" on a point-to-point link? The only thing special about /112 is that

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Oct 13, 2009, at 4:26 PM, Chris Adams wrote: Once upon a time, Michael Dillon said: How many addresses do you like on point-to-point circuits? That will become one of those great interview questions, because anyone who says something like "a /127" or "a /64" will be someone that you p

Re: ISP customer assignments

Once upon a time, Michael Dillon said: > > How many addresses do you like on point-to-point circuits? > > That will become one of those great interview questions, because anyone who > says > something like "a /127" or "a /64" will be someone that you probably > don't want to hire. > > The right

Re: ISP customer assignments

eric clark wrote: So far, I have only dabbled with IPv6, but my reading of the RFCs is that VLSM for lengths beyond /64 is not required. Subsequently, to use anything longer is an enormous gamble in an enterprise environment. I envision upgrading code one day and finding that your /127 isn't supp

Re: ISP customer assignments

So far, I have only dabbled with IPv6, but my reading of the RFCs is that VLSM for lengths beyond /64 is not required. Subsequently, to use anything longer is an enormous gamble in an enterprise environment. I envision upgrading code one day and finding that your /127 isn't supported any more and t

Re: ISP customer assignments

Dan White wrote: Occam did it partially right. They're half-bridging only - not true layer 2 to an aggregator (which is not necessary in their scenario). The problem with the access vendor doing half-bridging is that they have to be very layer-3 smart, and Occam was not quite there for IPv6 last

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 13/10/09 15:32 -0500, Justin Shore wrote: one like the BARs. Occam did it right. They didn't try to pretend to be in the router business. They stuck with L2. Occam did it partially right. They're half-bridging only - not true layer 2 to an aggregator (which is not necessary in their scena

Re: ISP customer assignments

Dan White wrote: I don't recall if Pannaway is a layer 3 or layer 2 DSLAM, but we have a mix of Calix C7 (ATM) and Calix E5 (Ethernet) gear in our network. We're kinda in the same boat, but we expect to be able to gracefully transition to dual stacked IPv4/IPv6 without having to replace DSL modem

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Oct 13, 2009, at 9:56 PM, Joe Abley wrote: On 2009-10-13, at 14:46, Matthew Petach wrote: I allocate a /64, but currently I configure only a /127 subnet on the actual interface. For BRAS/PPPoE deployments you're dealing with a point-to-point link, so in principle you can number the en

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 2009-10-13, at 14:46, Matthew Petach wrote: I allocate a /64, but currently I configure only a /127 subnet on the actual interface. For BRAS/PPPoE deployments you're dealing with a point-to-point link, so in principle you can number the endpoints using whatever you want. They're just h

Re: ISP customer assignments

> I'm ok with teaching it to beginners to explain where we came from but that > should be it. But why does that have to be done first? Why can't they teach current best practice in addressing, and then point out that historically it was done different but that caused problems which led to today's

Re: ISP customer assignments

> How many addresses do you like on point-to-point circuits? That will become one of those great interview questions, because anyone who says something like "a /127" or "a /64" will be someone that you probably don't want to hire. The right answer is to explain that there are some issues surround

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Scott Morris wrote: > How many addresses do you like on point-to-point circuits? > > Scott > > I allocate a /64, but currently I configure only a /127 subnet on the actual interface. That prevents the neighbor table explosion/NS/ND traffic flooding challenges tha

Re: ISP customer assignments

> He didn't really give much of a reason for the /127s yet.  I think it's > coming up in a later session.  I think it basically boiled down to whether > or not the customer would actually use anything bigger.  I'll write back > when we get into that discussion. As a service provider, you do not ha

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 2009-10-13, at 08:05, Scott Morris wrote: While I may agree that teaching classful routing is stupid, the addressing part lets people start getting the concept of binary. That's true of classless addressing, too. When students have problems with non-octet bit boundaries, that just means

Re: ISP customer assignments

George Michaelson wrote: As a point of view on this, a member of staff from APNIC was doing a Masters of IT in the last 3-4 years, and had classfull A/B/C addressing taught to her in the networks unit. She found it quite a struggle to convince the lecturer that reality had moved on and they had

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:14:59 -0400 Joe Abley wrote: > > While I may agree that teaching classful routing is stupid, the > > addressing part lets people start getting the concept of binary. > > That's true of classless addressing, too. When students have > problems with non-octet bit boundaries,

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 12/10/09 21:34 -0500, Justin Shore wrote: To go along with Dan's query from above, what are the preferred methods that other SPs are using to deploy IPv6 with non-IPv6-capable edge hardware? We too have a very limited number of dialup customers and will never sink another dollar in the p

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 13/10/09 15:33, Justin Shore wrote: He didn't really give much of a reason for the /127s yet. I think it's coming up in a later session. I think it basically boiled down to whether or not the customer would actually use anything bigger. I'll write back when we get into that discussion. Anyth

Re: ISP customer assignments

Doug Barton wrote: Out of curiosity who is conducting this class and what was their rationale for using /127s? It's a GK class. The instructor seems to be fairly knowledgeable and has a lengthy history consulting on and deploying IPv6. The class seems to be geared much more towards enterpri

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 07:39:46 EDT, Scott Morris said: > No idea, I haven't looked at that stuff in a while. But I would assume > so, as it's easier to build a foundation than jumping straight to > something difficult? Unfortunately, classful addressing is a foundation for networking the same way

Re: ISP customer assignments

Heh - Every time I try to say something close to "don't ever use this" or "not really used anymore" WRT RIP I get a student or three that is using it, and in fact it is there only option due to certain vendors' choices of what routing protocols to support on certain classes of gear. /TJ ... really

Re: ISP customer assignments

Ok, fair enough. I was working on the presumption not so much that it was simpler but more than it provided a logical structure. Having some framework to start with provides a base. True that binary is binary is binary... But rather than just an amorphous collection of x-number of bits, there's

Re: ISP customer assignments

While I may agree that teaching classful routing is stupid, the addressing part lets people start getting the concept of binary. While I'd love to think that people coming out of the school system have a grasp of simple mathematical skills, more and more I'm finding that's not the case.I would

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 2009-10-13, at 07:39, Scott Morris wrote: No idea, I haven't looked at that stuff in a while. But I would assume so, as it's easier to build a foundation than jumping straight to something difficult? I've found RIP to be a reasonable way to teach the concept of a routing protocol, si

Re: ISP customer assignments

No idea, I haven't looked at that stuff in a while. But I would assume so, as it's easier to build a foundation than jumping straight to something difficult? Or did you learn calculus in grade school? Just askin' ;) Scott Mark Newton wrote: > > On 13/10/2009, at 2:02 PM, Scott Morris wrote

Re: ISP customer assignments

Nathan Ward, please stand up. Adrian On Tue, Oct 13, 2009, TJ wrote: > > -Original Message- > From: Justin > To go along with Dan's query from above, what are the preferred methods > that other SPs are using to deploy IPv6 with non-IPv6-capable edge > hardware? We too have a very li

RE: ISP customer assignments

-Original Message- From: Justin To go along with Dan's query from above, what are the preferred methods that other SPs are using to deploy IPv6 with non-IPv6-capable edge hardware? We too have a very limited number of dialup customers and will never sink another dollar in the product.

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:32:23 -0400 Scott Morris wrote: > I'm going to have to pull the "mixed-hat" on this one. If you are > comparing this to a true "academia" environment, I'd agree with you. > Too much theory, not enough reality in things. However, I've yet to see > the part about where the

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 13/10/2009, at 2:02 PM, Scott Morris wrote: I happen to train people at CCIE level. I also happen to do consulting, implementation, and design work. In my training environment, there are all sorts of re-thinking of what/how things are being taught even within the confines of comparis

Re: ISP customer assignments

I'm going to have to pull the "mixed-hat" on this one. If you are comparing this to a true "academia" environment, I'd agree with you. Too much theory, not enough reality in things. However, I've yet to see the part about where the person is being trained from. I happen to train people at CCIE

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 13/10/2009, at 12:54 PM, Doug Barton wrote: On Oct 12, 2009, at 7:34 PM, Justin Shore wrote: I'm actually taking an IPv6 class right now and the topic of customer assignments came up today (day 1). The instructor was suggesting dynamically allocating /127s to residential customers.

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Oct 12, 2009, at 7:34 PM, Justin Shore wrote: I'm actually taking an IPv6 class right now and the topic of customer assignments came up today (day 1). The instructor was suggesting dynamically allocating /127s to residential customers. I relayed the gist of this thread to him (/48, /5

Re: ISP customer assignments

Dan White wrote: How are other providers approaching dial-up? I would presume we are in the same boat as a lot of other folks - we have aging dial-up equipment that does not support IPv6 (3com Total Control). Our customer base has dropped quite a bit, and we have even kicked around the idea dropp

Re: ISP customer assignments

> How are other providers approaching dial-up? I would presume we are in the > same boat as a lot of other folks - we have aging dial-up equipment that > does not support IPv6 (3com Total Control). Our customer base has dropped > quite a bit, and we have even kicked around the idea dropping that se

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 08/10/09 11:46 +0100, Michael Dillon wrote: There seems to be a variance between "It's OK to just give out a /64" to "You better be thinking about giving out a /48". I can live in those boundaries and am most likely fine with either. I'm leaning toward a /56 for regular subscribers and a /48 o

Re: ISP customer assignments

> Sorry to be a curmudgeon and let me play devil's advocate for a minute.  I > realize that the address space is enormous; gigantic, even, but if we treat > it as cavalierly as you all are proposing, it will get used up.  If its > treated like an infinite resource  that will never, ever be used up

Re: ISP customer assignments

And I will play devil's advocate to the devil's advocate ... wait, does that make me God's advocate? Nice! On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 10:24 AM, Curtis Maurand wrote: > > Sorry to be a curmudgeon and let me play devil's advocate for a minute. I > realize that the address space is enormous; giganti

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Thu, Oct 08, 2009 at 10:24:30AM -0400, Curtis Maurand wrote: > > Sorry to be a curmudgeon and let me play devil's advocate for a minute. > I realize that the address space is enormous; gigantic, even, but if we > treat it as cavalierly as you all are proposing, it will get used up. > If it

Re: ISP customer assignments

Sorry to be a curmudgeon and let me play devil's advocate for a minute. I realize that the address space is enormous; gigantic, even, but if we treat it as cavalierly as you all are proposing, it will get used up. If its treated like an infinite resource that will never, ever be used up as

Re: ISP customer assignments

> There seems to be a variance between "It's OK to just give out a /64" to > "You better be thinking about giving out a /48". I can live in those > boundaries and am most likely fine with either. I'm leaning toward a /56 > for regular subscribers and a /48 only for business or large scale > custome

Re: ISP customer assignments

> I would disagree. IPv6 is designed around class boundaries which, in my > understanding, are: > > A layer two network gets assigned a /64 > A customer gets assigned a /48 A "site" gets assigned a /48. It could be a customer site, or one of your many sites or one of a customer's many sites. I int

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:40:40 -0400, Mark Smith wrote: I think it is both "classless" and "classfull" (although it's different enough that we probably should stop using loaded IPv4 terms ...) It's _classless_. There's none of this Class A, B, C, D, or E nonsense. The word everyone is danci

Re: ISP customer assignments

>>  unimaginably huge *classless* network.  Yet, 2 hours into day one, a >>  classful boundary has already been woven into it's DNA.  Saying it's No bit patterns in a V6 address indicate total size of a network. v6 doesn't bring classful addressing back or get rid of CIDR.. v6 dispenses with somet

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Tue, 6 Oct 2009 09:25:44 -0500 Dan White wrote: > On 05/10/09 23:23 -0400, Ricky Beam wrote: > > You underestimate the power of the marketing department and the bean > > counters. I assure you, residential ISPs are looking for schemes to give > > out as little address space as possible. >

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Tue, 06 Oct 2009 09:34:28 PDT, Owen DeLong said: > although that isn't the case today. However, I believe > that 90.1 is supposed to be parsed equivalent to 90.0.0.1 > and 90.5.1 is supposed to be treated as 90.5.0.1, so, > 32.1.13.184.241.1 should also work for the above if > you expanded tod

Re: ISP customer assignments

On Oct 6, 2009, at 7:29 AM, Lee Howard wrote: -Original Message- From: robert.e.vanor...@frb.gov [mailto:robert.e.vanor...@frb.gov] Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 7:41 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: ISP customer assignments Organizations will be provided /48s or smaller, but

Re: ISP customer assignments

Owen DeLong wrote: Part of the reason that 128 bits was chosen (64 bits is FAR more than enough) was that it allowed for 64 bits of stateless auto-configuration (IEEE was already pushing EUI-64) within each network and still provided more than enough network numbers. I'm sure the Really Smart

RE: ISP customer assignments

05, 2009 10:23 PM > To: Joe Greco; robert.e.vanor...@frb.gov > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: ISP customer assignments > > On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 20:14:01 -0400, Joe Greco > wrote: > > Generally speaking, we shouldn't *want* end users to be provided with > a > &

RE: ISP customer assignments

> -Original Message- > From: robert.e.vanor...@frb.gov [mailto:robert.e.vanor...@frb.gov] > Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 7:41 PM > To: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: ISP customer assignments > > Organizations will be provided /48s or smaller, but given the current

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 05/10/09 23:23 -0400, Ricky Beam wrote: You underestimate the power of the marketing department and the bean counters. I assure you, residential ISPs are looking for schemes to give out as little address space as possible. That has not been my (limited) experience. If you are aware of any

RE: ISP customer assignments

> -Original Message- > From: William Herrin [mailto:herrin-na...@dirtside.com] > Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 12:58 PM > To: Brian Johnson > Cc: nanog@nanog.org > Subject: Re: ISP customer assignments > > /60 - the smallest amount you should allocate to a downstr

Re: ISP customer assignments

Actually, I would argue IPv6 is a bit of both classfull and classless. (Moreso the latter ...) The protocol itself, /64 "mandate" aside, certainly allows you to place arbitrary-bit-long prefix lengths - and to aggregate/summarize at any point. And /64s do not so much apply in some cases, whether

Re: ISP customer assignments

On 05/10/09 22:53 -0400, Ricky Beam wrote: On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:55:35 -0400, Dan White wrote: All of the items in the above list are true of DHCP. ... In an IPv4 world (which is where DHCP lives), it's much MUCH harder to track assignments -- I don't share my DHCP logs with anyone, nor do

  1   2   >