Re: What is BCP re De-Aggregation: strict filtering /48s out of /32 RIR minimums.

[Michael Smith <mksmith () mac com>]

On Nov 14, 2012, at 10:06 AM, William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Ben S. Butler
> <Ben.Butler () c2internet net> wrote:
> > Yes, nice.  But... It does not address the case when this is
> > not the ISPs customers but the ISP (read content provider)
> > that operates globally but without a network interconnecting
> > their routers.
>
> Hi Ben,
>
> That case is covered by things like ARIN's multiple discrete networks
> policy which permit an ISP /32 or end-user /48 for _each_ distinct
> network. There are plenty of addresses in IPv6. You should be break up
> a /32 for traffic engineering purposes, not for the sake of handling
> multiple disconnected sites. And when exercising TE, you can offer a
> covering route and expect the network as a whole to still function
> regardless of other folks' suballocation filtering.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin

I guess I'm confused.  I have a /32 that I have broken up into /47's for my discrete POP locations.  I don't have a 
network between them, by design.  And, I won't announce the /32 covering route because there is no single POP that can 
take requests for the entire /32 - think regionalized anycast.

So, how is it "worse" to announce the deaggregated /47's versus getting a /32 for every POP?  In either case, I'm going 
to put the same number of routes into the DFZ.

Mike