On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 12:05 +0100, Alexander Koch wrote:
On Wed, 2 March 2005 11:32:26 +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote: [..]
The question boils down to: - do you require a entry in the routing table or: - do you need address space
Giving a /32 to such a site would be quite some waste, as you will never use it. A /40 could be appropriate. But do you really need the entry in the routing table?
Cool. Then we as a transit provider have a problem. Well, we have a handful of customers with /48 and some /64, but that are not exactly that many... 80% of our v6 customers run BGP with their /48 or /32...
That is indeed a problem for such a setup. But this is a problem with the policy and the thought behind the policy than with your setup :) As such, these cases should be covered in the policy too. But Tiscali already has a very well working IPv6 connectivity and I assume that you also have the _plan_ of providing connectivity for more than 200 customers at some point in the very distant future, so actually it is not a big issue. But it is for some indeed :( Greets, Jeroen