[ppml] Technical reason why /52,/56,/60,/64 are bad

[Paul Wilson]

>
> After I wrote my first message, which Michael quoted, I read the
> PPML message more carefully and saw that it concerned LIRs
> (effectively ISPs, I think) providing PI space for their customers.
>  This would mean that the /64 prefixes would not be advertised in
> BGP.  So I wrote a retraction to the IETF list:
>
>   http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg47249.html
>
> Can someone confirm my second understanding is correct?

Robin,

Speaking for APNIC, this is correct - the longer prefixes are for customer 
assignments only, and are expected to be aggregated within larger portable 
blocks (allocations) held by ISPs, which under current policy are /32 at 
least.

The longest portable prefix that we currently assign is /48.

Paul Wilson
APNIC



________________________________________________________________________
Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC                      <dg at apnic.net>
http://www.apnic.net                            ph/fx +61 7 3858 3100/99