Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?

• Subject: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?
• From: edward.dore at freethought-internet.co.uk (Edward Dore)
• Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 15:04:55 +0100
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]>

RIPE Labs had an interesting article about filtering of /48 prefixes earlier this year that might be of some interest to you: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/ripe-atlas-a-case-study-of-ipv6-48-filtering

There's also a useful RIPE Labs article on general prefix filtering lengths from August last year: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/dbayer/visibility-of-prefix-lengths

Edward Dore 
Freethought Internet 

On 11 Oct 2012, at 22:02, Jo Rhett wrote:

> I've finally convinced $DAYJOB to deploy IPv6.  Justification for the IP space is easy, however the truth is that a /64 is more than we need in all locations. However the last I heard was that you can't effectively announce anything smaller than a /48.  Is this still true?
> 
> Is this likely to change in the immediate future, or do I need to ask for a /44?
> 
> -- 
> Jo Rhett
> Net Consonance : net philanthropy to improve open source and internet projects.
> 
> 
> 

• References:
  • Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?
    • From: jrhett at netconsonance.com (Jo Rhett)

• Prev by Date: Attacking on Source Port 0 (ZERO)
• Next by Date: best way to create entropy?
• Previous by thread: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?
• Next by thread: Is a /48 still the smallest thing you can route independently?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread