[ipv6-wg] Draft Agenda (v1) for ipv6 wg RIPE51
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Draft Agenda (v1) for ipv6 wg RIPE51
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Draft Agenda (v2) for ipv6 wg RIPE51
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mattias.Lignell at teliasonera.com
Mattias.Lignell at teliasonera.com
Mon Oct 3 19:26:39 CEST 2005
Hello again, I will have a second look at this and discuss the issue internally. I sure hope we can remove the /32's. /// Mattias > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeroen Massar [mailto:jeroen at unfix.org] > Sent: Monday, October 03, 2005 7:15 PM > To: Lignell, Mattias E. > Cc: gert at space.net; david.kessens at nokia.com; eva at telia.net; > Lind, Mikael E.; amar at telia.net; ipv6-wg at ripe.net > Subject: RE: [ipv6-wg] Draft Agenda (v1) for ipv6 wg RIPE51 > > On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 18:59 +0200, Mattias.Lignell at teliasonera.com > wrote: > > Hello all, > > > > About the /32's; they are announced on purpose. The reason > is that we > > have had problems with some ISP's BGP filters that are set to a > > maximum size of /32. As a result did not our IPv6 customers get > > connectivity via ISP's using the /32 size filters. Maybe this is a > > problem only we run in to being one of the first using a very large > > prefix. However, the BGP filters may be updated by now so > we can stop announcing the /32's. > > Thanks for the response, the prefix filtering is not too good > to hear and has been seen before; I know that Daniel Roesen > has been very busy trying to get C&W's /20 available to ISP's > using, amongst others, the output from: > http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/compare/?a=2001:5000::/21&b=200 > 1:650::/32 > At the moment apparently Cisco doesn't see the /21... > > This can be easily applied to Telia's /20: > http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/compare/?a=2001:2000::/20&b=200 > 1:2040::/32 > > This compares 2001:2000::/20 with 2001:2040::/32. > Taking a quick look it looks quite good, ignoring the light > orange which is there because of the added ASN. There are > only few ISP's who report different paths: > AS 6435 - LavaNet (us / Hawaii) > AS 9264 - Academic Services Network (tw) > AS21155 - Proserve (nl) > AS28788 - Unilogic (nl) {using same upstreams as AS21155) > > You might want to contact these ISP's to ask them + upstreams > to fix their filtering, clearly something is being filtered, > otherwise the paths where the same. > > Greets, > Jeroen > >
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Draft Agenda (v1) for ipv6 wg RIPE51
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Draft Agenda (v2) for ipv6 wg RIPE51
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]