nanog mailing list archives
Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?
From: Randy Carpenter <rcarpen () network1 net>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 17:28:37 -0400 (EDT)
--- jrhett () netconsonance com wrote: From: Jo Rhett <jrhett () netconsonance com> I've finally convinced $DAYJOB to deploy IPv6. Justification for the IP space is easy, however the truth is that a /64 is more than we need in all locations. However the last I heard was that you can't effectively announce anything smaller than a /48. Is this still true? Is this likely to change in the immediate future, or do I need to ask for a /44? ---------------------------------------------------- A /48 is 65536 /64s and a /44 is 16x65536 /64s. If you only need one subnet (1 subnet = 1 /64), why would you try to get 16x65536 subnets, rather than the 65536 you have in the /48? scott
He said it was for multiple sites. Per ARIN policy, the next biggest chunk from a /48 is a /44, so a /44 is what should be asked for. It is perfectly justifiable if you have more than 1 site. I would not expect anything smaller than a /48 to be allowed in BGP. A bonus would be that a /44 currently costs the same as a /48 for an enduser, so there really is no drawback from getting the /44, and having enough space to not have to worry about it in the future. -Randy
Current thread:
- Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Jo Rhett (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Jeroen Massar (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Jo Rhett (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Owen DeLong (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? William Herrin (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? bmanning (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Bush (Oct 13)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Måns Nilsson (Oct 13)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Edward Dore (Oct 14)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Scott Weeks (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Carpenter (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Jo Rhett (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Carpenter (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Justin M. Streiner (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? William Herrin (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Owen DeLong (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Carpenter (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Jimmy Hess (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Carpenter (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Jeroen Massar (Oct 11)
- Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Randy Carpenter (Oct 11)