Re: IPv6 internet broken, Verizon route prefix length policy

[Adrian Chadd <adrian () creative net au>]

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:

> You get some substantial wins for the non-TE case by being able to fix
> the legacy cruft.  For instance, AS1312 advertises 4 prefixes:
> 63.164.28.0/22, 128.173.0.0/16, 192.70.187.0/24, 198.82.0.0/16
> but on the IPv6 side we've just got 2001:468:c80::/48.
>
> And we're currently advertising *more* address space in one /48 than we
> are in the 4 IPv4 prefixes - we have a large chunk of wireless network that
> is currently NAT'ed into the 172.31 space because we simply ran out of room
> in our 2 /16s - but we give those users globally routed IPv6 addresses.


I suggest you're not yet doing enough IPv6 traffic to have to care
about IPv6 TE.

2c,



Adrian