dusty old routers with ram problems...
solution there: re-think the way you do your routing and compare the price
of ram versus cpu cycles. (as well as having custom hardware developed to
do it on, intel simply does not offer enough address bus lines to maintain
bigass tables and address them linearily so you can keep entries for each
ip or mac address out there and counters with them to automatically
"migitate" ddos attacks and give every communications partner their own
fair share on the outgoing interface's capacity).
(and no, we're not talking linux/bsd here... just dedicated routing
firmware on let's say ibm's power-6/power-7 platform)
instead of buying the same old shit from juniper/cisco/foundry again which
doesn't even have enough ram to announce /30's ipv4 (if everyone would do
so ;), let alone properly prevent ddos attacks from even being possible
--
Greetings,
Sven Olaf Kamphuis,
CB3ROB Ltd. & Co. KG
=========================================================================
Address: Koloniestrasse 34 VAT Tax ID: DE267268209
D-13359 Registration: HRA 42834 B
BERLIN Phone: +31/(0)87-8747479
Germany GSM: +49/(0)152-26410799
RIPE: CBSK1-RIPE e-Mail: s...@cb3rob.net
=========================================================================
<penpen> C3P0, der elektrische Westerwelle
=========================================================================
Confidential: Please be advised that the information contained in this
email message, including all attached documents or files, is privileged
and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or
individuals addressed. Any other use, dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Oct 26, 2010, at 7:06 AM, TJ wrote:
Quick comment:
IGP bloat != BGP bloat. Your customers cannot announce the space you gave
them externally - unless ~/32s, i.e. forced aggregation.
He's talking about the bloat that comes from ISPs getting slow-started and then
only being able to increase their network in increments of 2x each time, so,
effectively ISP gets:
1 x /32 Initial
Fills that up, gets
1 x /32 First subsequent
Then
1 x /31
then
1 x /30
etc.
Probably not quite as bad as IPv4, but, potentially close.
Also, your customers shouldn't need to come back for more very often and
ideally you have some reservations for them a well :).
Consider the scenario where you're dealing with an ISP that provides
services to other ISPs as his downstream customers and the above
statement doesn't hold true like you think it should.
Owen
/TJ
PS - apologies for top posting.
On Oct 26, 2010 9:59 AM, "Jack Bates" <jba...@brightok.net> wrote:
So, the best that I can tell (still not through debating with RIR), the
IPv6 routing table will see lots of bloat. Here's my reasoning so far:
1) RIR (ARIN in this case, don't know other RIR interpretations) only
does initial assignments to barely cover the minimum. If you need more
due to routing, you'll need to provide every pop, counts per pop, etc,
to show how v6 will require more than just the minimums (full routing
plan and customer counts to justify routing plan). HD-Ratio has NO
bearing on initial allocation, and while policy dictates that it doesn't
matter how an ISP assigns to customer so long as HD-Ratio is met, that
is not the case when providing justification for the initial allocation.
2) Subsequent requests only double in size according to policy (so just
keep going back over and over since HD is met immediately due to the
minimalist initial assignment?)
So I conclude that since I get a bare minimum, I can only assign a bare
minimum. Since everything is quickly maxed out, I must request more (but
only double), which in turn I can assign, but my customer assignments
(Telcos/ISPs in this case) will be non-contiguous due to the limited
available space I have to hand out. This will lead to IGP bloat, and in
cases of multi-homed customers whom I provide address space for, BGP
bloat.
I'm small, so my bloat factor is small, but I can quickly see this
developing exactly as my v4 network did (if it was years ago when I
first got my v4 allocation, growing to today, for each allocation I got
for v4, I'd expect similar out of v6). Sure, the end user gets loads of
space with those nice /48's, but the space within ISPs and their ISP
customers is force limited by initial allocations which will create
fragmentation of address space. This is brought about due to the dual
standard of initial vs subsequent allocations (just enough to cover
existing vs HD Ratio).
As an example, Using HD-Ratios as an initial assignment metric can
warrant a /27, whereas the minimalist approach may only warrant a
heavily utilized /30. 3 bits doesn't seem like much, but it's a huge
difference in growth room. Bare minimums, as provided by me, only
included the /24 IPv4 DHCP pools converted with a raw conversion as /32
IPv4 = /48 IPv6 network
Am I missing something, or is this minimalist approach going to cause
issues in BGP the same as v4 did?
Jack
