I understand the problems but I think there are clear cut cases where /48's make sense- a large scale anycast DNS provider would seem to be a good candidate for a /48 and I would hope it would get routed. Then again that might be the only sensible reason...
Don't give people an excuse to deagg their /32 brandon
I understand the problems but I think there are clear cut cases where /48's make sense- a large scale anycast DNS provider would seem to be a good candidate for a /48 and I would hope it would get routed. Then again that might be the only sensible reason...
Don't give people an excuse to deagg their /32 RIPE may only give out /32's but ARIN gives out /48's so there wouldn't be any deaggregation in that case.
It's a question of cost versus benefit. Does it make more sense to save a routing table entry- or reduce traffic by localizing DNS through anycasting? -Don
On 29 May 2007, at 6:23pm, Donald Stahl wrote: [...]
RIPE may only give out /32's but ARIN gives out /48's so there wouldn't be any deaggregation in that case.
The RIPE NCC assign /48s from 2001:0678::/29 according to ripe-404: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-404.html Regards, Leo
RIPE may only give out /32's but ARIN gives out /48's so there wouldn't be any deaggregation in that case.
The RIPE NCC assign /48s from 2001:0678::/29 according to ripe-404:
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-404.html Yeah I missed that. This matches ARIN's policy for critical infrastructure.
-Don
participants (3)
-
Brandon Butterworth -
Donald Stahl -
Leo Vegoda