On Thu, 27 Dec 2007 19:56:19 -0000 <michael.dillon@bt.com> wrote:
-Do not assign from PoP aggregates
What do you mean with the above? If I understand the line correctly, then I disagree with it.
I don't mean anything by that, I just quoted it from the wiki page. If you disgree then you should add something to the page.
Probably even better, raise the point on the V6OPS working group mailing list, so that it can be included in the "IPv6 Unicast Address Assignment Considerations" Internet Draft/future RFC. Addressing options, and the pros and cons of them are what the draft is about. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-v6ops-addcon-07.txt
I have a vague memory that this advice was given in a NANOG presentation on IPv6 but it would not surprise me if it was a case where one size does not fit all.
PoP aggregates sounds like a good idea to me, but given the need to meet a certain HD ratio in order to get a larger RIR allocation, it might be risky for an ISP to do that. This is one area where the operator environment differs from the enterprise.
--Michael Dillon
Regards, Mark. -- "Sheep are slow and tasty, and therefore must remain constantly alert." - Bruce Schneier, "Beyond Fear"