nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:22:46 -0400
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:13 PM, Seth Mattinen <sethm () rollernet us> wrote:
Leo Bicknell wrote:Worse, the problem is being made worse at an alarming rate. MPLS VPN's are quicky replacing frame relay, ATM, and leased line circuits adding MPLS lables and VPN/VRF routes to edge routers. Various RIR's are pushing "PI for all" in IPv6 based on addressing availbility. Some networks are actually finally using multicast for IPTV services, generating much larger number of entries than the global multicast table would otherwise indicate.It's not the RIR's fault. IPv6 wasn't designed with any kind of workable site multihoming. The only goal seems to have been to limit /32's to an
here's where a pointer to this dicussion of ~4yrs ago should be (on this list no less)... that said: "Hey, this is afu, if you as operators want this to work properly, please, please, please get your butts on v6ops@ietf and make some noise." I believe that'd have been from me, but marla azinger also sent out some similar emails and presented 2-3 times at past nanog meetings about multihoming options wrt ipv6. This ain't gonna get fixed by nanog-kvetching.
"ISP" but screw you if you aren't one. There was no alternative and it's been how long now? PI, multihoming, multicast, etc. is reality because the internet is now Very Serious Business for many, many people.
v6 was designed in an era quite different than today's network. there were a large number of assumptions made, practically none of which hold water today. this can't get fixed here, please see v6man/v6ops@ietf. Alternately please see rrg@ietf or lisp@ietf, rrg's looking to make a decision on their research 'soon', lisp is looking for active folks to provide comment/direction...
Yes, I know there's hacks like SHIM6 and I don't wish to go OT into a
there are no (save lisp) network based 'hacks' for this... shim6/hip/mip all basically do host-level multihoming, which is cool, and may be useful to some folks, but they are not useful for folks trying to do TE in the network. (which also was hashed out quite a bit on this list)
debate about them, so I'll just say that if there had been a viable alternative to multihoming as we know it I think it would have been given a go before policy got pushed to the RIR's to allow IPv6 PI.
100% agreement... wanna join in the discussion and offer some options/fixes/commentary? -chris
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Christopher Morrow (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Adrian Chadd (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Kevin Loch (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Seth Mattinen (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Valdis . Kletnieks (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Nathan Ward (Oct 13)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Leo Bicknell (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Seth Mattinen (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Adrian Chadd (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Christopher Morrow (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Leo Bicknell (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Joel Jaeggli (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Jeff McAdams (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Nathan Ward (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Owen DeLong (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Christopher Morrow (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Seth Mattinen (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Jeff McAdams (Oct 12)
- Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy Seth Mattinen (Oct 12)