[6bone] 2001:478:: as /48

[John Fraizer]

On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, Michel Py wrote:

> Bill,
> 
> I don't see it as unaggregated and I believe I'm not the only one. I
> dropped my ipv6 prefix-lists and I have a BGP4+ feed from three
> different pTLAs.
> 
> Is there any document you can point us to that specifies that it should
> be unaggregated? It is possible that a very small portion of the 6bone
> will actually see a /48, as my understanding is a number of us do indeed
> use something more or less than:
> 
> ipv6 prefix-list strict seq 5 permit 3ffe::/17 ge 24 le 24
> ipv6 prefix-list strict seq 10 permit 3ffe:8000::/17 ge 28 le 28
> ipv6 prefix-list strict seq 15 permit 3ffe:4000::/18 ge 32 le 32
> ipv6 prefix-list strict seq 20 permit 2000::/3 ge 16 le 16
> ipv6 prefix-list strict seq 25 permit 2001::/16 ge 29 le 35
> ipv6 prefix-list strict seq 30 deny 2000::/3
> 
> [prefix-list stolen from Pim Van Pelt]
> 
> Michel.


Michel,

Bill was just notifying us that we SHOULD accept the prefixes as
un-aggregated, not that they were in the wild yet, unaggregated.  The
reason you may not be seeing them (at least from us) as unaggregated is
that I have yet to open up our filters to them until I get verification
from Bill that my filter is right.  I don't wanna leak the wrong thing. As
for documentation, I generally take Bill at his word when it comes to
things like this.

Bill, if you will, please add CMH-IX (http://www.cmh-ix.net/) to the list
of IPv6 exchanges at www.ep.net.  The CMH-IX site itself will be updated
to reflect this service sometime this weekend.



---
John Fraizer              | High-Security Datacenter Services |
EnterZone, Inc            | Dedicated circuits 64k - 155M OC3 |
http://www.enterzone.net/ | Virtual, Dedicated, Colocation    |