Subject: RE: Moving forward on Site-Local and Local Addressing

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 19:03:28 -0700

Jeroen,

> Jeroen Massar wrote:
> At this moment you can announce almost anything
> you want apparently.

Yep I see /32 /33 /35 /40 /41 /42 /44 /48 /64 from some
peers, Including some interesting ones such as:
2001:530:DEAD:BEAD::/64

This is the very reason we have to be very careful with any kind of
globally unique address that has a global scope, because it can really
quickly degenerate into having clueless ISPs that don't care to clueful
salespersons that see an opportunity. As a few thousand prefixes would
not be a problem at the beginning, it might take of really quick leaving
a big mess to clean up some years later.

> Fortunatly there are clued ISP's who do
> filter accordingly to:
> http://www.space.net/~gert/RIPE/ipv6-filters.html

NRENS do filter too for what I have seen.

> As you are probably one of the many people who really
> knows that we need is: Multihoming ;)

How did you guess that?

Michel.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Tim Chown <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 10:59:18 +0100

> NRENS do filter too for what I have seen.

Yes, they do, on /32 or /35.

They are also likely to stop accepting 6bone routes soon (I believe GEANT
will filter these in the next 2-3 months).

Bad practice comes from those who aren't using IPv6 on a day-to-day basis.
When there's dependency or money involved, polices will tighten :)

Tim