[AusNOG] another ipv6 Q

[Joseph Goldman]

Thanks for the extra info! It certainly is a much different world to IPv4!

In regards to justify a /28, its not so much about end users but 
multiple of sites. When I was working on the assumption I'd have to 
split up a bigger block into /32's, which you've now corrected, I was 
thinking, a /28 has 16x /32's, so that gives me 16 different subnets I 
can advertise based on the different POP's I may advertise from.

In regards to advertising the same subnet in multiple places and routing 
internally, it doesn't really make good business sense and/or network 
design to do that. If I had a /28 advertised both Sydney and say New 
Zealand, but didn't necessarily buy point to point transit, just each 
had their own transit local to where they are, it seems bad business 
sense to have traffic come into my Sydney network, just to route it back 
out to the New Zealand network. Im kinda double handling the traffic.

In that instance though, as you've pointed out, I'd be requesting more 
/32's, so I can advertise at the /32 size based on the location/POP.

Thanks,
Joe

On 03/07/14 16:40, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> On 2014-07-03 02:12, Joseph Goldman wrote:
> [..]
>>   My main question for confirmation was, that I should perhaps request a
>> larger block from APNIC to then split that into /32's to hand out to my
>> multiple POP's (say a /30 or /28 or something).
> Even if you have a /28 you are not supposed to split it up either, it is
> called Provider Aggregated (PA) for a reason.
>
> While most filters will allow it, folks will just special case you as a
> /28, as that is what it is, nothing else. This happened to the US DOD as
> an extreme example (they forced ARIN to give them a IPv6 /13 worth of
> 14x /22s, as nothing else sits there, it is a really nice single /13
> though).
>
> Take a small guess why folks like Google requested space from each RIR...
>
> Also, can you justify a /28 of address space? As in, will you ever have
> so many customer sites that you can fill that up, even remotely?
>
>> Luckily I currently have
>> a lot of IPv4 so requesting more won't cost more, just trying to
>> determine best way forward for the company with an IPv6 deployment,
>> across cities/states/countries.
> If you have enough customers to fully fill a /32, then your network will
> be large enough to accept traffic for the aggregate in multiple
> locations and backhaul that traffic internally...
>
> Greets,
>   Jeroen
>