Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-14 Thread Edward Dore
RIPE Labs had an interesting article about filtering of /48 prefixes earlier this year that might be of some interest to you: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/ripe-atlas-a-case-study-of-ipv6-48-filtering There's also a useful RIPE Labs article on general prefix filtering lengths from

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-13 Thread Randy Bush
Jo Rhett wrote: I've finally convinced $DAYJOB to deploy IPv6. Justification for the IP space is easy, however the truth is that a /64 is more than we need in all locations. However the last I heard was that you can't effectively announce anything smaller than a /48. Is this still true?

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-13 Thread Måns Nilsson
Subject: Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently? Date: Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 09:01:51AM -1000 Quoting Randy Bush (ra...@psg.com): /48 is the new /24 Except you can stuff pretty much into one. I'm numbering my entire workplace from one. 1500 people and 26 offices. Our

Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Jo Rhett
I've finally convinced $DAYJOB to deploy IPv6. Justification for the IP space is easy, however the truth is that a /64 is more than we need in all locations. However the last I heard was that you can't effectively announce anything smaller than a /48. Is this still true? Is this likely to

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Jeroen Massar
On 2012-10-11 23:02 , Jo Rhett wrote: I've finally convinced $DAYJOB to deploy IPv6. Justification for the IP space is easy, however the truth is that a /64 is more than we need in all locations. However the last I heard was that you can't effectively announce anything smaller than a /48. Is

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Scott Weeks
--- jrh...@netconsonance.com wrote: From: Jo Rhett jrh...@netconsonance.com I've finally convinced $DAYJOB to deploy IPv6. Justification for the IP space is easy, however the truth is that a /64 is more than we need in all locations. However the last I heard was that you can't effectively

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Randy Carpenter
--- jrh...@netconsonance.com wrote: From: Jo Rhett jrh...@netconsonance.com I've finally convinced $DAYJOB to deploy IPv6. Justification for the IP space is easy, however the truth is that a /64 is more than we need in all locations. However the last I heard was that you can't

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Jo Rhett
First: But likely if you are in that camp, just asking for address space, that you can use stably for a long time, from your network provider who provides you connectivity is a better way to go. Um, sorry I figured by the fact that I was posting on Nanog the context was clear, but I've

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Jo Rhett
On Oct 11, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote: so there really is no drawback from getting the /44, and having enough space to not have to worry about it in the future. It's only a worry if you can only route /48s, which was my question. And seriously, we're going to be banging around

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread William Herrin
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Jo Rhett jrh...@netconsonance.com wrote: I've finally convinced $DAYJOB to deploy IPv6. Justification for the IP space is easy, however the truth is that a /64 is more than we need in all locations. However the last I heard was that you can't effectively

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread bmanning
one of the downsides to v6 is the huge amnt of space the folks expect you to announce. lots of space to do nefarious things. that said. if you select your peers carefully and don't mind a bit of hand crafting, you can /96 and even /112 that said, get a /32 and assign/announce /48s... /bill

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Scott Weeks
--- rcar...@network1.net wrote: From: Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net --- jrh...@netconsonance.com wrote: From: Jo Rhett jrh...@netconsonance.com I've finally convinced $DAYJOB to deploy IPv6. Justification for the IP space is easy, however the truth is that a /64 is more than we need

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Randy Carpenter
- Original Message - On Oct 11, 2012, at 2:28 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote: so there really is no drawback from getting the /44, and having enough space to not have to worry about it in the future. It's only a worry if you can only route /48s, which was my question. And

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread William Herrin
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net wrote: How many sites do you have? If less than 192, /44 is perfect, unless some of those sites require more than a /48. Then, it gets more complicated :-) We're having a general math breakdown today. First Jeroen wants to

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Owen DeLong
Wow and I thought nibble boundaries would make the math easier than HD ratios. Here's the breakdown for those who are mathematically challenged: n sites prefix 0 Nothing. 1 /48 2-12/44 13-191 /40

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Randy Carpenter
- Original Message - On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net wrote: How many sites do you have? If less than 192, /44 is perfect, unless some of those sites require more than a /48. Then, it gets more complicated :-) We're having a general math

Re: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

2012-10-11 Thread Jimmy Hess
On 10/11/12, William Herrin b...@herrin.us wrote: On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Randy Carpenter rcar...@network1.net wrote: How many sites do you have? If less than 192, /44 is perfect, unless some of those sites require more than a /48. Then, it gets more complicated :-) We're having a