[AusNOG] another ipv6 Q
Joseph Goldman
joe at apcs.com.au
Thu Jul 3 15:54:04 EST 2014
Keeping this on-list, even though specific to my situation, in case it
answers others questions:
To chime in on this Skeeve, I currently have a /32 assigned from APNIC
(inside 2400::/12), so by what your saying I can only advertise the /32
and never anything bigger (smaller, lol)?
Should I be requesting a larger /30 from APNIC so I have the opportunity
to split /32's across sites?
If I own a /32 how do I manage multi-homing in regards to trying to
manage inbound traffic? A decent, easy method of this now is path
prepending different /24's on your transit providers to try and
artificially generate more traffic on a peer, how would I go about
similar things in IPv6? Or is this where having multiple /32's comes in
to effect and doing the same, but at the /32 level?
Is it possible to request blocks from APNIC that fall within a range
that is allowed to go down to /48? Or is this just problematic in general?
Thanks,
Joe
On 03/07/14 15:35, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
> OK... so here goes.
>
> My opinion is that what SAGE is doing is well meaning, but ultimately
> problematic.
>
> They should not be breaking down their /32 for members to announce /48's.
>
> The reasoning for this was a significant part of my policy proposal
> 083 a couple of years ago
> (https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-083)
>
> The issue was that if I got a /32, I was not able to break it down for
> announcement if I want to put part of it in a different
> (non-connected/aggregated) location. So the policy allows you to get
> another block to announce in that location.
>
> The key issue here is that SAGE's /32 allocation is from a block,
> where if strict BOGON listing is used, means their member routes will
> be dropped.
>
> For example, the current ipv6 BOGON list is:
> (http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html
> <http://www.space.net/%7Egert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html>)
>
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict deny 3ffe::/16 le 128
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2001:500::/30 ge 48 le 48
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict deny 2001:db8::/32 le 128
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2001::/32
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2001::/16 ge 35 le 35
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2001::/16 ge 19 le 32
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2001:0678::/29 le 48
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2001:0c00::/23 ge 48 le 48
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2001:13c7:6000::/36 le 48
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2001:13c7:7000::/36 le 48
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2001:43f8::/29 ge 40 le 48
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2002::/16
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2003::/16 ge 19 le 32
> *ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2400::/12 ge 19 le 32*
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2600::/12 ge 19 le 32
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2610::/23 ge 24 le 32
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2620::/23 ge 40 le 48
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2800::/12 ge 19 le 32
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2a00::/12 ge 19 le 32
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2801:0000::/24 le 48
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict permit 2c00::/12 ge 19 le 32
> ipv6 prefix-list ipv6-ebgp-strict deny 0::/0 le 128
> If you look at the block SAGE is in, their block, in strict form,
> means anything smaller than a /32 will be dropped.
>
> Members who get a /48 from APNIC are from a different pool, 2001
> somewhere, which has a /48 length.
>
> So... sorry SAGE, but you pooched this one.
>
> ...Skeeve
>
> *Skeeve Stevens - *eintellego Networks Pty Ltd
> skeeve at eintellegonetworks.com <mailto:skeeve at eintellegonetworks.com> ;
> www.eintellegonetworks.com <http://www.eintellegonetworks.com/>
>
> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
>
> facebook.com/eintellegonetworks
> <http://facebook.com/eintellegonetworks> ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
> <http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve>
>
> twitter.com/theispguy <http://twitter.com/theispguy> ; blog:
> www.theispguy.com <http://www.theispguy.com/>
>
>
> The Experts Who The Experts Call
>
> Juniper - Cisco - Cloud- Consulting- IPv4 Brokering
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Jeroen Massar <jeroen at massar.ch
> <mailto:jeroen at massar.ch>> wrote:
>
> On 2014-07-02 23:41, Robert Hudson wrote:
> > > So whats the min mask length. So it I wanted to multihome
> would I be
> > > okay with 1 /48 or will up streams take /49-64 ?
> >
> > /48 is the accepted minimum.
> >
> >
> > Which is why SAGE-AU settled on offering an IPv6 /48 to every member
> > (and yes, this does mean that as a business, if all you want is
> an IPv6
> > /48, you can get a completely portable /48 allocation from
> SAGE-AU for
> > $165 a year instead of paying the APNIC membership fee if the
> member you
> > pay for agrees to utilise the allocation for your business
> purposes).
>
> Quick check:
>
> inet6num: 2406:C500::/32
> netname: TSAGOA
> descr: The System Administrators Guild of Australia
> country: AU
>
> That is a single /32, out of the PA block of APNIC. Hence, unless you
> convince every single ISP in the world to accept it, the only
> thing you
> can announce is that /32, nothing else.
>
> More specifics will properly be dropped.
>
> Please don't spam the BGP tables with more specifics. If you need
> PI, go
> get a distinct PI block for that site from your favourite LIR.
>
> Greets,
> Jeroen
>
>
> Oh and yes, it will be a lot of fun when some large company is
> going to
> split and then have to split up their IPv6 address space, somebody
> will
> be renumbering a lot of hosts... ;)
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20140703/a4bec9d4/attachment.html>
More information about the AusNOG
mailing list