nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 routing /48s
From: bill fumerola <billf () mu org>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:33:09 -0800
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 04:46:08PM -0600, Robert.E.VanOrmer () frb gov wrote:
ARIN claims they are seeing /48s routed, at least in their route tables. I have seen some new momentum on the allocation of /32's, don't know if that is in response to rules like this?? Would be awefully difficult for our organization to come up with the rationale to need 65K /48s internally to justify a /32.
i can verify this. Verizon refused to route $employer's /44. any complaints were met with "just because ARIN gives you space doesn't mean we have to route it". -- bill
Current thread:
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s, (continued)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Jeroen Massar (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Pekka Savola (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Geoff Huston (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Antonio Querubin (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Paul Timmins (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Antonio Querubin (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Paul Timmins (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Christopher Morrow (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Kevin Loch (Nov 18)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Nathan Ward (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Jack Bates (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Michael Sinatra (Nov 19)
- RE: IPv6 routing /48s TJ (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Jack Bates (Nov 19)
- RE: IPv6 routing /48s TJ (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Christopher Morrow (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Jack Bates (Nov 19)
- Re: IPv6 routing /48s Christopher Morrow (Nov 19)