Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2017-06-29/17 17:06, Job Snijders wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:09:25PM +0200, Thomas Bellman wrote: >> I know that many devices allow you to configure any subnet size, but >> is there any RFC allowing you to use e.g. /124 or /126? >

RE: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

Thanks Mark, I'm not much into the cellular realm other than Ethernet cell-backhaul, which isn't cell at all but rather just hauling Ethernet/vlan frames across my network as fast as I can :) ...so does what you said mean ipv6 prefixes are delegated to phones ? -Aaron Gould

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

> if you don't need SLAAC, do whatever makes sense for you. And never be > greedy: give your end-users a /48 i say give them a /129 just to piss off a certin bigot :)

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

> I wouldn't use link-local in context of Inter-Domain Routing. indeed randy

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

In message <20170629150630.glfvte2ures27p2n@Vurt.local>, Job Snijders writes: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:09:25PM +0200, Thomas Bellman wrote: > > On 2017-06-28 17:03, William Herrin wrote: > > > The common recommendations for IPv6 point to point interface numbering > > > are: > > > > > > /64

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

On Thu, 29 Jun 2017, William Herrin wrote: Heck, I’m gonna do whatever it takes to NOT subnet on bits with my v6 deployment. Hopefully with v6, gone are the days of binary subnetting math. I hedged my bets when I laid out our v6 space at my previous $dayjob. We used /126s for

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 12:51 AM, Aaron Gould wrote: > Thanks Bill, I thought with ipv6 it was a sin to subnet on bit boundaries > and not on nibble boundaries. > Hi Aaron, Not a sin but you're making more work for yourself if you subnet on other-than four-bit nibble

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 11:09:25PM +0200, Thomas Bellman wrote: > On 2017-06-28 17:03, William Herrin wrote: > > The common recommendations for IPv6 point to point interface numbering are: > > > > /64 > > /124 > > /126 > > /127 > > I thought the only allowed subnet prefix lengths for IPv6 were

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2017-06-28 17:03, William Herrin wrote: > The common recommendations for IPv6 point to point interface numbering are: > > /64 > /124 > /126 > /127 I thought the only allowed subnet prefix lengths for IPv6 were /64 and /127. RFC 4291 states:

RE: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

[mailto:b...@herrin.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 7:33 PM To: Aaron Gould <aar...@gvtc.com> Cc: Tom Beecher <beec...@beecher.cc>; Job Snijders <j...@instituut.net>; nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 8:01 PM, Aaron Goul

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Olivier Benghozi < olivier.bengh...@wifirst.fr> wrote: > Well, /112 is not a stupid option (and is far smarter than /64): it > contains the whole last nibble of an IPv6, that is x:x:x:x:x:x:x:1234. > You always put 1 or 2 at the end, and if needed you are still

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

On 6/28/17 15:44, William Herrin wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Thomas Bellman wrote: > >> On 2017-06-28 17:03, William Herrin wrote: >> >>> The common recommendations for IPv6 point to point interface numbering >> are: >>> /64 >>> /124 >>> /126 >>> /127 >> I

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

On 6/28/17 18:10, Olivier Benghozi wrote: > Well, /112 is not a stupid option (and is far smarter than /64): it contains > the whole last nibble of an IPv6, that is x:x:x:x:x:x:x:1234. > You always put 1 or 2 at the end, and if needed you are still able to address > additional stuff would the

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

Well, /112 is not a stupid option (and is far smarter than /64): it contains the whole last nibble of an IPv6, that is x:x:x:x:x:x:x:1234. You always put 1 or 2 at the end, and if needed you are still able to address additional stuff would the point-to-point link become a LAN. And you don't

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

Once upon a time, William Herrin said: > 112... Could be worse I suppose. They could have picked 113. A /112 means you can always use ::1 and ::2 for you endpoints. Of course, you could allocate at /112 boundary and still use a /126 (or even a /127 and use ::0 and ::1). --

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 8:01 PM, Aaron Gould wrote: > I think this is funny... I have (4) 10 gig internet connections and here's > the maskings for my v6 dual stacking... > > /126 - telia > /64 - att > /112 - cogent > /127 - twc/charter/spectrum > 112... Could be worse I

RE: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

I think this is funny... I have (4) 10 gig internet connections and here's the maskings for my v6 dual stacking... /126 - telia /64 - att /112 - cogent /127 - twc/charter/spectrum - Aaron Gould

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Thomas Bellman wrote: > On 2017-06-28 17:03, William Herrin wrote: > > > The common recommendations for IPv6 point to point interface numbering > are: > > /64 > > /124 > > /126 > > /127 > > I thought the only allowed subnet prefix lengths for

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

What subnet mask you are people using for point to point IPs between two ASes? Specially with IPv6, We have a transit provider who wants us to use /64 which does not make sense for this purpose. isn’t it recommended to use /127 as per RFC 6164 like /30 and /31 are common for IPv4. You can just

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

Hello, The common recommendations for IPv6 point to point interface numbering are: /64 /124 /126 /127 /64: Advantages: conforms to IPv6 standard for a LAN link Disadvantages: DOS threats against this design. Looping on a true ptp circuit. Neighbor discovery issues. /124: Advantages: supports

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

You should be using /126 or /127 for point to point links that touch external networks unless you like extraneous NS messages and full neighbor cache tables. :) On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Job Snijders wrote: > On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 at 22:29, Krunal Shah

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 at 22:29, Krunal Shah wrote: > Hello, > > What subnet mask you are people using for point to point IPs between two > ASes? Specially with IPv6, We have a transit provider who wants us to use > /64 which does not make sense for this purpose. isn’t it

Re: Point 2 point IPs between ASes

* ks...@primustel.ca (Krunal Shah) [Tue 27 Jun 2017, 22:28 CEST]: What subnet mask you are people using for point to point IPs between two ASes? Specially with IPv6, We have a transit provider who wants us to use /64 which does not make sense for this purpose. isn’t it recommended to use /127