[6bone] non-global address space for IXs (was: 2001:478:: as /48)

[John Fraizer]

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Jeroen Massar wrote:

> But as the IX prefixes are only intended for peering exchanges
> and not for services this all should not be a problem unless you
> are at that IX, in which case you have a static route, not in BGP.

Um, you mean a connected route, right?

> People should set up loopback interfaces anyways and use that
> address for their routers, so that the IX prefix never appears
> on the wire to the outside world.

OK.  So in an exchange point situation, where you are connecting to a L2
fabric and using a common network so you can make use of a route-server
and not be required to have N^2 BGP sessions to have redundancy, how do
you propose this happen?  You just added MORE complexity to use a
route-server rather than taking it away.

Bill never *DEMANDED* that anyone accept 2001:478:: prefixes at all.  He
simply made the same announcement that he has for the previous two
years: Don't expect to see this one as a /32 but rather as /48's, IF you
see it at all.

If you don't like it, filter it.  I could care less, as I'm sure Bill
could.  If you don't connect to one of the IX's that use EP.NET address
space, you never have to see it at all.  Deal with it and stop your
whining, bitching and moaning.  Nobody is making you do anything and
you're not going to make US do anything either.

As for AMS-IX predating 2001:478::, perhaps it predates the prefix but it
does NOT predate EP.NET or the services that Bill has been providing to
exchange points in the US.


--
John Fraizer
EnterZone, Inc 
(13944+$|13944+_14813+$|13944+_17266+$)
PGP Key = 6C5903C4
Fingerprint = 2AA6 6614 1B5E EDD2 38AD C417 3E61 F975 6C59 03C4