Henrik Lund Kramshøj
hlk at kramse.org
Fri Feb 4 14:48:07 CET 2011
On 04/02/2011, at 14.31, Roger Wiklund wrote:
> What's the latest take on IPv6 multihoming? There are alot of
> documents out there but many of them are a a few years old with alot
> of assumptions/suggestions.
> According to RIPE the minimum PI allocation is a /48.
> Most specific prefix we allow when peering is /48. We can also
> advertise other ISPs PA ranges. I had a look at Telias lookinglass in
> Stockholm, I saw lots of /48s there.
> I'm just curious because it seems that there is nothing "official" or
> best pratice, so this will break if some ISPs decides to filter on /32
> or something.
> What's your take on this?
Tried talking to RIPE about getting PI IPv6 space, but no luck yet :-(
with regards to filtering BGP I will probably follow, be inspired by, the great work from Team Cymru
such as the filtering recommendations from:
combined with the listings from:
in essence, you can probably filter a lot of /48 except the ones from "real PI space", micro allocations
to root servers, internet exchanges etc.
My problem is that I would like to filter more strict, but if I would allow other customers, and their
PA space from another provider multihoming to me, then I would announce /48s to the internet ...
I understand that handing out PI IPv6 space left and right to anybody might create other problems,
but I have current PI IPv4 customers that wont adopt IPv6, as they have no addresses (except the ones
from my PA space).
I would prefer that larger networks would get a PI /48 more easily and think IPv6 would benefit now!
PS I am looking forward to next RIPE meeting, discussing this and other matters :-)
Henrik Lund Kramshøj, Follower of the Great Way of Unix
hlk at kramse.org hlk at solidonetworks.com
+45 2026 6000 cand.scient CISSP CEH
http://solidonetworks.com/ Network Security is a business enabler
More information about the ipv6-ops