nanog mailing list archives
Re: IPv6 Prefix announcing
From: Seth Mattinen <sethm () rollernet us>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:51:59 -0700
On 4/26/2011 09:39, Kate Gerry wrote:
Funny enough, some carriers actually require the 'smallest' as being /32... :(
This is becoming the exception now, not the rule. Last year I was fighting with Verizon about their refusal to carry /48s. That, together with the impasse of figuring out how to put dual stack IPv6 on an Ethernet port (it was delivered as IPv4 only multiple times), I never accepted it and went with a competitor who got it right the first time. However, I've had several sources tell me Verizon has since backpedaled and now accepts /48s. ~Seth
Current thread:
- IPv6 Prefix announcing Nick Olsen (Apr 26)
- Re: IPv6 Prefix announcing Justin M. Streiner (Apr 26)
- RE: IPv6 Prefix announcing Kate Gerry (Apr 26)
- Re: IPv6 Prefix announcing Patrick W. Gilmore (Apr 26)
- RE: IPv6 Prefix announcing George Bonser (Apr 26)
- Re: IPv6 Prefix announcing Owen DeLong (Apr 26)
- Re: IPv6 Prefix announcing Seth Mattinen (Apr 26)
- RE: IPv6 Prefix announcing Michael K. Smith - Adhost (Apr 26)
- RE: IPv6 Prefix announcing Kate Gerry (Apr 26)
- Re: IPv6 Prefix announcing Justin M. Streiner (Apr 26)
- Re: IPv6 Prefix announcing William Herrin (Apr 26)