nanog mailing list archives
Re: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike () swm pp se>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 12:58:20 +0100 (CET)
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
customers something bigger, like a /64, a /56 or even a /48. (Yes, we have enough address space for a /48 per customer.)
The good part about using /48 is that it gives customers an even : boundry for their space. Apart from that, I think /56 is a better idea (or perhaps even a /60). Good point there about autoconfiguration, subnetting using less than /64 is probably a bad idea.
So, out of our /32, if we assign each customer a /48 we can only support 65k customers. So in order to support millions of customers, we need a new allocation and I would really like for each new subnet allocated to be very much larger so we in the forseeable future don't need to get a newer one. So for larger ISPs with millions of customers, next step after /32 should be /20 (or in that neighborhood). Does RIPE/ARIN policy conform to this, so we don't end up with ISPs themselves having tens of aggregates (we don't need to drive the default free FIB more than what's really needed).
Other option is to have more restrictive assignments to end users and therefore save on the /32, but that might be bad as well (long term).
-- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike () swm pp se
Current thread:
- Re: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?, (continued)
- Re: European ISP enables IPv6 for all? Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 19)
- Re: European ISP enables IPv6 for all? Mohacsi Janos (Dec 19)
- /56 for home sites, /48 for business sites & billing considerations (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Jeroen Massar (Dec 19)
- Re: /56 for home sites, /48 for business sites & billing considerations (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Mohacsi Janos (Dec 19)
- Re: /56 for home sites, /48 for business sites & billing considerations (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Christopher Morrow (Dec 19)
- Re: /56 for home sites, /48 for business sites & billing considerations (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Jeroen Massar (Dec 19)
- Re: /56 for home sites, /48 for business sites & billing considerations (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Mohacsi Janos (Dec 21)
- Re: /56 for home sites, /48 for business sites & billing considerations (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Leo Vegoda (Dec 23)
- Re: /56 for home sites, /48 for business sites & billing considerations (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Jeroen Massar (Dec 23)
- Re: European ISP enables IPv6 for all? Iljitsch van Beijnum (Dec 19)
- Re: European ISP enables IPv6 for all? Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 19)
- Re: European ISP enables IPv6 for all? Andy Davidson (Dec 19)
- /48 for each and every endsite (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Jeroen Massar (Dec 19)
- Re: /48 for each and every endsite (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Andy Davidson (Dec 19)
- Re: /48 for each and every endsite (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 19)
- Re: /48 for each and every endsite (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Christopher Morrow (Dec 19)
- Re: /48 for each and every endsite (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Jeroen Massar (Dec 19)
- Re: /48 for each and every endsite (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Jeroen Massar (Dec 19)
- Re: /48 for each and every endsite (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 19)
- Re: /48 for each and every endsite (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Owen DeLong (Dec 19)
- Re: /48 for each and every endsite (Was: European ISP enables IPv6 for all?) Mikael Abrahamsson (Dec 19)