Hi Andrew,

On Jan 30, 2007, at 11:22 AM, Andrew Alston wrote:

Hi Vincent,



I’m ok with all of this except for the following:



* The intial provider independent assignment size to an end-site should be a /48, or a shorter/longer prefix if the end-site can justify it.



I’m happy with /48s, I’m even happier with bigger blocks, but there should *NEVER* be a situation where the block is smaller than this in the global routing tables. If the blocks can ever be smaller than /48 in size it is going to create major BGP filtering headaches.


We covered the *smaller than* allocation to cater for end-sites such as IXP's. It's an option.

-v


Can this wording be clarified?



Many Thanks



Andrew Alston

TENET – Chief Technology Officer

_______________________________________________
resource-policy mailing list
resource-policy@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/resource-policy

_______________________________________________
resource-policy mailing list
resource-policy@afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/resource-policy

Reply via email to