Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary

[George Herbert <george.herbert () gmail com>]

If the LIRs cannot get separate allocations from the RIR (and separate
ASNs) for this usage, something is wrong.

We want to make things as simple and efficient as possible, but no
simpler or more efficient, because the curves go back up again at that
point, and we all suffer.


-george

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 3:32 PM, Sander Steffann <sander () steffann nl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > What should happen is this  "quasi-legitimate"  method  of
> > multi-homing should just be declared illegitimate for IPv6, to
> > facilitate stricter filtering. Instead, what should happen is the
> > multi-homing should be required to fit into one of 3 scenarios,  so
> > any announcement with an IPv6 prefix length other than the
> > RIR-allocated/assigned PA or PI block size can be  treated as TE and
> > summarily discarded or prioritizes when table resources are scarce.
>
> Splitting the allocation can be done for many reasons. There are known cases where one LIR operates multiple separate 
> networks, each with a separate routing policy. They cannot get multiple allocations from the RIR and they cannot 
> announce the whole allocation as a whole because of the separate routing policies (who are sometimes required 
> legally, for example when an NREN has both a commercial and an educational network). Deaggregating to /48's is not a 
> good idea, but giving an LIR a few bits (something like 3 or 4) to deaggregate makes sense.
>
> - Sander



-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert () gmail com