Hi, for the size of the routing table it does not matter if you advertise 2x /48 or 2x /51 ;) I would say its even better to have 2x /48 because the risk is 8x lower that you will need to have another network because you need to have more IPs.
best regards Rolf > Hey, you nailed me on the head! > > I have a /48 from ARIN and tried to advertise a /51 in datacenter 1 and a > /51 in datacenter 2. Upstream, in massive quantity, rejected all > advertisements < /48. > > Which, unfortunately, is a problem. That means if I want to use my own > address space in two datacenters, I have to go get another /48 for the > other > datacenter. This will indeed grow the routing table, when I have no need > for so much address space. > > Scott > > On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 4:31 AM, George B. <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 12:50 AM, Rolf Hanßen <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > it looks to me you calculate with an amount of v6 routes similar to >> the >> > number of v4 routes today and I thinks that this won't happen. >> > For example: RIPE has assigned 5x IPv4 PA networks to us during the >> last >> > 10 years but we only use one /32 v6 network. We furthermore had to >> splitt >> > up those v4 assignments because we have a split network with several >> > independent locations not connected together. This increased the >> number >> of >> > prefixes we announce very fast. >> > So the amount of v6 prefixes created from us will be much lower and I >> > think other providers may have similar spaces they use. >> > Even if you enable v6 for all networks currently using v4 I think >> total >> > amount will keep below 100k routes. >> > >> > kind regards >> > Rolf >> >> For people who can qualify for a /32, particularly those who grew late >> in the game, yes, there will be considerable consolidation. What I >> was more concerned about was smaller end user networks who currently >> have a multi-homed /20 or smaller allocation that will be getting a >> /44 or smaller v6 allocation and will keep both the v4 and v6 >> addresses. >> >> There are a lot of multi-homed /24 nets out there that will become a >> /24 v4 and a /48 v6 announcement. I suppose the vendors could help >> things somewhat by not putting the entire 128 bits into hardware. >> There is really no reason to have more than 64 bits for routing as the >> last 64 bits are "supposed" to be host IPs ... but how many out there >> are using /127 for point-to-points between routers? You aren't >> "supposed" to subnet anything smaller than a /64 but many do. >> >> One thing I have noticed is that some networks are apparently >> filtering anything smaller than a /32 from PA space but allowing >> smaller nets from PI space designed for that purpose (down to a /48, I >> think). Anyone trying to multi-home a /64 is going to have a hard go >> of it, I think, but someone is bound to try! >> >> George >> >> _______________________________________________ >> foundry-nsp mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp >> > _______________________________________________ foundry-nsp mailing list [email protected] http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp
