[6bone] Re: [ipv6-wg@ripe.net] Update on IPv6 filter recommendation
John Fraizer
tvo@EnterZone.Net
Tue, 13 May 2003 13:36:02 -0400 (EDT)
On Tue, 13 May 2003, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> John Fraizer wrote:
>
> > I don't think that an exception should be made for microallocations at
> > all. To paraphrase what ARIN says, there is no guarantee that address
> > space that they assign will be globally routable.
>
> You should note that that also goes for the rest of the allocations.
> 69/8 in IPv4 anyone ? :)
The alloocations I have seen have problems out of 69/8 were not
micro-allocations. They were /19's and /18's. I'm sure that there are a
few /20's in there with a token /24 perhaps but, the ones I have knowledge
of were _real_ allocations and not micro-allocations.
The issue of reachability of those allocations was brought on NOT by
people being filtered based on prefix length but because so many people
were using outdated BOGON filters - filters that would have even blocked
69.0.0.0/8 had it been announced.
>
> If an ISP decides to filter it's their choice, it is also their
> network and their money (and isn't that what it is all about?)
How about this: If an ISP sees what a pile of crap the IPv4 tables have
become and filters responsibly in v6, despite non-responsible allocations
made by ARIN, I would tend to look at it as a responsible community member
telling an irresponsible community member that we don't want IPv6 SWAMP
space and the routing table bloat that it will lead to.
>
> That's why it's also good that Gert notified us of this change.
> Let's hope rpslng will come soon and that everybody in IPv6
> uses it correctly, that will be a big step forward for changes
> like these.
>
And I agree. It was nice that Gert notified us of the change. I am still
not opening up my filters for those prefixes though.
---
John Fraizer | High-Security Datacenter Services |
President | Dedicated circuits 64k - 155M OC3 |
EnterZone, Inc | Virtual, Dedicated, Colocation |
http://www.enterzone.net/ | Network Consulting Services |