IPv6 section of ARIN Number Resource Policy (Sec 6.5.1.1.c)
Hi, This question is about the IPv6 section of ARIN Number Resource Policy Manual.
From the manual (Section 6.5.1.1.c):
----- 6.5.1.1. Initial allocation criteria c. Plan to provide IPv6 connectivity to organizations to which it will assign IPv6 address space, by advertising that connectivity through its single aggregated address allocation ----- We have a problem with this policy and we would like to know if any other ISP experienced the same... The problem raises when a RIR assign a /28 prefix (for example) to an ISP which has 3 internet links with 3 different carriers (tier 1 carriers, for example) using BGP publications. Acording to ARIN (and most other RIRs) policy, the ISP must advertise through all the 3 links the /28 without the possibility of dissagregation. The problem with this policy is that by doing this, the ISP loses control of the traffic, not being able to distribute the traffic over the 3 different links. A /28 prefix may have a lot of incoming traffic associated to it, so I believe the dissagregation (subnets) of the prefix should be allowed by the policy. What do you think? Do you have a similar problem? Thanks, Nicolas Antoniello.
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Nicolás Antoniello wrote:
A /28 prefix may have a lot of incoming traffic associated to it, so I believe the dissagregation (subnets) of the prefix should be allowed by the policy.
What do you think? Do you have a similar problem?
Please achieve inbound load balancing on other, less network-stressful, ways. At least one way to do so to examine what can be done to influence your upstreams' (and recursively if applicable) route preferences (e.g., using communities). -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
Pekka Savola wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Nicolás Antoniello wrote:
A /28 prefix may have a lot of incoming traffic associated to it, so I believe the dissagregation (subnets) of the prefix should be allowed by the policy.
I guess you are talking about 2800:a0::/28 which was allocated by LACNIC, and not ARIN, 2 days ago and is not in the routing tables yet: http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/dfp/all/?country=uy Funnily 2001:13c0::/32 is also allocated to the same organization. Which was allocated 2005-08-10 and was seen already a week later. Thus either you figured out that the /32 was too small or you are trying to have two prefixes and announce them both ;) I assume the first, but the question then is, will you return it. Also folks: please register route6 objects in either RIPE or RADB (ARIN/APNIC/LACNIC don't where possible, that makes it much easier to determine if the correct ASN are originating the correct prefix.
What do you think? Do you have a similar problem?
Please achieve inbound load balancing on other, less network-stressful, ways. At least one way to do so to examine what can be done to influence your upstreams' (and recursively if applicable) route preferences (e.g., using communities).
Indeed. That is how it should be done. These issues should be handled by the routing protocol. Also: * ISP's are already de-aggregating their prefixes See http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/lg/?show=bogons&prefix=::/0 (Only run that query when you have the time to wait it is huge and it will make your firefox think it hangs ;) With loads of /35's, /40's and /48's which can easily be aggregated as they are coming from the same ASN, thus clearly they are not multihoming examples. But note that due to filtering some prefixes get really bad connectivity. As they will be filtered by the fast and speedy transits, while being accepted by the slow ones. The slow ones do announce it, thus in the end your packets will take the slow route. * What business has a RIR telling one how to do routing? RIR's should give out address space to organizations that need it and that is it. Note that Address Space != Routing. That a RIR recommends to not de-aggregate is VERY good hint from them though. But requirement is something else. For that matter, they can't stop you anyway. But other ISP's can and those are the ones one talks with and pays cash to to carry the prefixes(*). Do also note that the RIR's are community driven, as such the community makes up the rules, vote with your words if you need to. That said, ISP's that don't want de-aggregates can filter them out Examples here: http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html On another note here, when S-BGP gets introduced, are the RIR's going to give certificates away which allow announcing de-aggregates of allocations? :) If they don't then that will solve this de-aggregate problem in one go. "be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you receive" :) Greets, Jeroen * = Networking 101 for Evil Internet Beings: if you don't want to use the RIR's one can always setup his/her own RIR and simply pay ISP's to accept your prefix. Cash also works for creating .xxx TLD's and a lot of other things. And that is still the cool thing with the Internet, if you have enough force (cash, politics etc) or followers then at a certain point your part of the internet becomes important enough that people require it's use.
participants (3)
-
Jeroen Massar -
Nicolás Antoniello -
Pekka Savola