Dear Team,
Mr George Michaelson , in his blog , https://blog.apnic.net/2021/12/17/the-space-between-ipv6-allocations-part-2/ , mentioned that APNIC has changed the block based allocation method to delegations for NIRs (when and why was not mentioned in the blog).
As per my understanding, it’s like APNIC used to allocate big IPV6 block to NIR (for further allocation to its members) which has now been changed to direct delegations to members instead of NIR. A big block to NIR can help in super netting the v6 announcement at NIR (or at country level) , which can help in reducing the routing table size in long terms AND can also have IPv6 allocations in consecutive order for the economies where we have NIRs. APNIC still allots ASN block to NIRs for further allocation to NIR members.
So my question is what leads to change in IPv6 allocation method for NIRs ??
This is posted in INNOG , SANOG , APNIC-TALK mailing and a ticket with apnic helpdesk for getting the authenticated response from the source itself.
Regards Gaurav Kansal
Disclaimer:
This e-mail and its attachments may contain official Indian Government information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and delete this e-mail. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized. The responsibility lies with the recipient to check this email and any attachment for the presence of viruses.
Gaurav,
On Dec 20, 2021, at 9:56 PM, Gaurav Kansal gaurav.kansal@nic.in wrote:
A big block to NIR can help in super netting the v6 announcement at NIR (or at country level) , which can help in reducing the routing table size in long terms
How would this work exactly, given Internet connectivity and routing aggregation is provider-based and does not necessarily follow geopolitical boundaries?
AND can also have IPv6 allocations in consecutive order for the economies where we have NIRs.
Why would this be helpful?
APNIC still allots ASN block to NIRs for further allocation to NIR members.
ASNs are merely tags associated with a bunch of prefixes that have (in theory) a unique routing policy. As such, there isn’t much need to create aggregates, so how they are allocated doesn’t really matter.
Regards, -drc
Thanks David for your explanation.
To clarify, APNIC has never given NIRs large IPv6 blocks for sub-delegations; APNIC has always used direct delegation methods for IPv6 delegations to NIR Members. All IPv6 delegations to organizations under NIRs are directly from the APNIC pool, which give them the same position as APNIC direct Members in the IPv6 pool, to allow further growth.
The change from the previous NIR block-based process to direct delegation methods happened in 2004 and was for IPv4 only. The purpose of the change was for better aggregation, as APNIC has bigger pool than NIRs.
It looks like there are some confusion and APNIC will update the APNIC Blog to make it clearer.
Kind regards, Guangliang ==========
-----Original Message----- From: David Conrad drc@virtualized.org Sent: Wednesday, 22 December 2021 3:07 AM To: Gaurav Kansal gaurav.kansal@nic.in Cc: RT_helpdesk helpdesk@apnic.net; Mailman_innog innog@innog.net; sanog@sanog.org; apnic-talk@lists.apnic.net Subject: [apnic-talk]Re: Reg - IPV6 allocation method changes from block based to delegations based for NIR
Gaurav,
On Dec 20, 2021, at 9:56 PM, Gaurav Kansal gaurav.kansal@nic.in wrote:
A big block to NIR can help in super netting the v6 announcement at NIR (or at country level) , which can help in reducing the routing table size in long terms
How would this work exactly, given Internet connectivity and routing aggregation is provider-based and does not necessarily follow geopolitical boundaries?
AND can also have IPv6 allocations in consecutive order for the economies where we have NIRs.
Why would this be helpful?
APNIC still allots ASN block to NIRs for further allocation to NIR members.
ASNs are merely tags associated with a bunch of prefixes that have (in theory) a unique routing policy. As such, there isn’t much need to create aggregates, so how they are allocated doesn’t really matter.
Regards, -drc
As per my understanding, it’s like APNIC used to allocate big IPV6 block to NIR (for further allocation to its members) which has now been changed to direct delegations to members instead of NIR.
i will not speak to apnic's political actions, but
A big block to NIR can help in super netting the v6 announcement at NIR (or at country level) , which can help in reducing the routing table size in long terms AND can also have IPv6 allocations in consecutive order for the economies where we have NIRs.
this is severely broken. proxy aggregation is routing falsehood and goes against the use of bgp's abilities to route efficiently in the AS graph.
randy
--- randy@psg.com `gpg --locate-external-keys --auto-key-locate wkd randy@psg.com` signatures are back, thanks to dmarc header butchery
On 22/12/21 06:50, Randy Bush via sanog wrote:
A big block to NIR can help in super netting the v6 announcement at NIR (or at country level) , which can help in reducing the routing table size in long terms AND can also have IPv6 allocations in consecutive order for the economies where we have NIRs.
this is severely broken. proxy aggregation is routing falsehood and goes against the use of bgp's abilities to route efficiently in the AS graph.
I am surprised that anyone who has done any routing engineering in the wild would even consider that this might work.
Mark.
-
David Conrad -
Gaurav Kansal -
Guangliang Pan -
Mark Prior -
Randy Bush