nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 Advertisements
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () muada com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2007 16:56:57 +0200
On 1-jun-2007, at 14:58, Chris L. Morrow wrote:
I believe that a separate /48 per site is better regardless of whether or not the company has contracted with a single ISP for all sites, ornot. As far as I am concerned if there is a separate access circuit, then it is a site and it deserves its own /48 assignment/allocation.
So aggregation is no longer a goal?
why do you say that? he COULD mean that they should get their ipassignment from their provider, which would/should aggregate for him...right?
I thought we were talking about PI... Obviously with PA the only issue would be burning through an ISP's space very fast, but with IPv6 that's not a huge deal.
Current thread:
- RE: IPv6 Advertisements michael.dillon (Jun 01)
- Re: IPv6 Advertisements Iljitsch van Beijnum (Jun 01)
- RE: IPv6 Advertisements michael.dillon (Jun 01)
- Re: IPv6 Advertisements Stephen Sprunk (Jun 01)
- Re: IPv6 Advertisements Chris L. Morrow (Jun 01)
- Re: IPv6 Advertisements Iljitsch van Beijnum (Jun 02)
- Message not available
- Re: IPv6 Advertisements Iljitsch van Beijnum (Jun 02)
- Re: IPv6 Advertisements Stephen Sprunk (Jun 02)
- RE: IPv6 Advertisements michael.dillon (Jun 01)
- Re: IPv6 Advertisements Iljitsch van Beijnum (Jun 01)