[routing-wg] IPv6 Routing Recommendations.
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] IPv6 Routing Recommendations.
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] Weekly Routing Table Report
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Leo Vegoda
leo.vegoda at icann.org
Thu Mar 3 18:22:22 CET 2011
On 3 Mar 2011, at 1:56, Florian Weimer wrote: >> There is a valid need for some LIRs to advertise more than one IPv6 >> PA prefix. As either obtaining more address space and advertising >> more /32 prefixes, or advertising more specific prefixes within an >> already allocated /32 have the same impact on the routing table, >> it is suggested that the latter approach is taken to prevent address >> space wastage. > > Another approach would be to leave the filtering recommendation at > /32, and give LIRs the full /29 (or so) which is currently reserved > for them. That would not work well for a situation where people take RPKI into consideration when developing their routing policies. Also, I understand that the RIPE NCC has started using a sparse allocation mechanism for IPv6 allocations and this wouldn't work with that. Regards, Leo
- Previous message (by thread): [routing-wg] IPv6 Routing Recommendations.
- Next message (by thread): [routing-wg] Weekly Routing Table Report
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]