> On Sep 9, 2017, at 12:06 PM, Kody Vicknair <[email protected]> wrote: > > All, > > I’ve been doing some reading in preparation of IPv6 deployment and figuring > out how we will break up our /32. I think I’m on the right track in thinking > that each customer will be allocated a /48 to do whatever they wish with it.
Yes, please. If it turns out a /32 isn’t enough space to do this, then a /32 is too small for your network and you should trade it for a larger block. > I’ve read recent BCOP drafts that have been approved by the IETF: > https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-554 > It looks like the smallest subnet that should ever be assigned is a /64 on a > particular link. > > > Some questions that come to mind with IPv6: > > In regards to Point to point links my thinking is this: > Assign a unique /64 to each point to point link with these addresses being > Globally routable. This seems to be what our IX providers do when assigning > us an IPv6 address. Am I correct in this train of thought? Why/Why not? Yes and no. An IX is usually _NOT_ a point to point, but a layer 2 fabric much like a LAN except that it connects a bunch of different ASNs. Still assigning a /64 to point to points makes a lot of sense, even if you use them as /127s on the link. > In regards to core loopback addressing my initial thoughts are as follows: > Assign a single /64 encompassing all /128’s planned for loopback addressing > schemes. Should I be using Unique Local addressing for loopbacks instead of > going with a Globally routeable addressing scheme? Should each interface IP > configuration have a /64 or a /128? I prefer GUA. These might show up in traceroutes. Each LO interface should have a /128. There’s no point (in most situations) in giving anything more). > Also when talking about CPE mgmt addresses what do you think is a practical > way of going about assigning “Private” addressing schemes for cpe management > purposes. That’s way too open ended to provide useful advice. It really depends on your particular situation, topology, political limitations, and more. > I’m sure some of these questions will be answered when I dive deeper into how > OSPFv6 works as well as BGP in regards to IPv6. 99.9% they work just like in IPv4. > Are any of you currently running IPv6 and wished you had done something > differently during the planning phase that may have prevented headaches down > the road? Sounds like you’re generally on the right track. You may want to look in the archives for the NANOG on the Road in Las Vegas. I gave an Address Planning talk there and the slides should be online. If you’re anywhere near Cambridge, MA Thursday, I’ll be doing it again there. Owen > > > > > Kody Vicknair > Network Engineer > > > [cid:[email protected]] <http://www.rtconline.com> > > Tel: 985.536.1214 > Fax: 985.536.0300 > Email: [email protected] > Web: www.rtconline.com > > Reserve Telecommunications > 100 RTC Dr > Reserve, LA 70084 > > > > > > Disclaimer: > The information transmitted, including attachments, is intended only for the > person(s) or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential > and/or privileged material which should not disseminate, distribute or be > copied. Please notify Kody Vicknair immediately by e-mail if you have > received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. > E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as > information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or > incomplete, or contain viruses. Kody Vicknair therefore does not accept > liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which > arise as a result of e-mail transmission. >
