nanog mailing list archives
Re: Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration?
From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner () cluebyfour org>
Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2012 11:12:16 -0400 (EDT)
On Mon, 9 Jul 2012, Anurag Bhatia wrote:
I was just looking around and say a major Indian provider Sify (AS9583) is announcing /64s via BGP along with main /32 which is their allocation from APNIC.
[snip]
Is it simply a misconfiguration or there is some use of announcing /64s along with main /32?
Most of the major carriers I've seen appear to have settled on /48 as the smallest IPv6 prefix they will accept, much like /24 is the smallest IPv4 prefix that most providers will accept. Anything smaller runs the risk of mixed degrees of acceptance. As long as the /64 is part of a larger parent block, there shouldn't be any total loss of connectivity, however the routing to one of those /64 sites could be sub-optimal.
Advertising /64s into the global routing table is bad mojo. jms
Current thread:
- Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration? Anurag Bhatia (Jul 08)
- Re: Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration? Graham Beneke (Jul 09)
- Re: Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration? Aftab Siddiqui (Jul 09)
- Re: Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration? Joel jaeggli (Jul 09)
- Re: Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration? Frank Habicht (Jul 09)
- Re: Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration? Joel jaeggli (Jul 09)
- Re: Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration? Justin M. Streiner (Jul 09)
- Re: Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration? Justin M. Streiner (Jul 09)
- Re: Any advantage of announcing IPv6/64s Or purely misconfiguration? NIG NOG (Jul 09)