Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary

[Joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>]

On 3/9/12 20:42 , Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Mar 9, 2012, at 3:45 PM, Leo Vegoda wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Sander wrote:
> >
> > > 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).
> >
> > If they have two different routing policies and need two different 
> > allocations, why not just have two different LIRs? It makes things 
> > a lot easier than spending untold weeks or time trying to work out 
> > which corner cases should be supported by policy and which should 
> > not. No?
> >
> > Leo
>
>
> This may depend on where you are. Being two LIRs in the ARIN region 
> requires setting up two complete legal entities which is a lot of 
> overhead to carry for just that purpose.
>
> Owen
I'll put this as bluntly and succinctly as I can because I find the LIR
distriction arbitrary...

I have an ipv6 direct assignment from ARIN.

It is sized to meet the needs of my enterprise consistent with needs for
future growth number of pops, prevailing ARIN policy etc.

Because my network is discontiguous I must announce more specific routes
than the assignment in order to reflect the topology I have both in IPV4
and in IPV6.

I fully expect (and have no evidence to the contrary) that my transit
providers will accept the deaggreated prefixes and that their upstreams
and peers will by-in-large do likewise.

I have no interest in the general sense of deaggregating beyond the
level required by the topological considerations.

Imposing arbitary political considerations on organizations that are
simply trying to operate networks in order preserve maximal aggregation
at a given level seems absurd on the face of it.

I am reasonably certain that every wholesale transit provider on this
list that offers ipv6 transit would be willing to accept by money and
route my prefixes in their current form.