On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 10:57:00PM -0500, Jeremy Lumby wrote:
> ..however the IP address renumbering seems to have fallen by the wayside..
Since I volunteered for this, I've tried several times internally to
discuss the direction to go, but maybe we should just take it for public
discussion instead of waiting more for my cohorts.
I didn't know the schedule for the switch cutover until the day it happened,
otherwise I would have tried to get more things done ahead of time.
I've previously posted an outline of my thoughts for cutover, maybe
we'll just make them firm in this posting.
First off, once things are settled, I won't just depend on a list
posting for distributing info, I'll email the peering email address of
each member with their specific info, so please confirm back that
you've received it.
We've pretty much settled on IPv4 addressing the same keeping the
last octet. We need to settle on IPv6 addressing.
Owen Delong has suggested that we embed the ASN and switch & port into
the IPv6 address, others have said it isn't needed. We have such large
space, we can do just about any scheme. I'd just have to precalculate
each IPv6 address and send it off to everybody.
We'll just start by taking the first IPv6 network, leaving the others
Would it be nice to have something like 2001:504:27:0:0:1e49:1:3/64
(in particular to identify ipHouse), vs. 2001:504:27:0:0:1055:1:4/64
(to identify TDS?).
Or just match up how things are now with 2001:504:27:0::3 & ::4?
(the existing IP addresses started out with port # at the end, but of
course things had to change up as we went along, the port #s would stay
correct on IPv6).
Do the same with the route servers? Or make them shorter? 2001:504:27::1?
In order for people to start announcing prefixes with nexthop
addresses as the new IPs, everybody needs to at least have the new
prefix on as a secondary or another IP address on their MICE facing
interfaces to reach them. Not everybody has done that yet, although
many did do the IPv4 portion already.
How about we set a drop-dead due date of 10/1/2012 for allowing
everybody to do this in whatever maintenance window they see
appropriate. 3 weeks out is pretty reasonable I think, but I don't
know other's policies on scheduling their windows if they want to
minimize whatever impact this causes (minimal I think).
The route servers are listening now on 188.8.131.52 & 184.108.40.206 as
well as the old IPs. BIRD hasn't been restarted yet though.
I plan on creating new BIRD configs with the router-id in 220.127.116.11
& 2001:504:27::/64 for every member.
This should allow any member past the secondary IP day to change to
connect to the new IP, announce as their new IP, and have their
prefixes be reachable by all members. This can happen on their
schedule at any time after the 10/1/2012 date.
Bilateral peering members can update between themselves at any point
in time once they have their IP assignments if their gear supports
that level of control, but multilateral peering to the route servers
should still be announcing the old IP addresses as next-hop for now
until after the 10/1/2012 date.
Final cleanup of old IP addressing.
As people cutover after the 10/1/2012 date, I expect them to swap
primary and secondary IP addresses in their MICE facing interfaces
(assuming cisco config here) but until everybody is cutover,
members will probably want to retain a secondary in the old range in
order to reach people that haven't changed their BGP setup yet.
Should we set a date of 1/1/2013 as final cleanup and IP address turn
in day back to Airstream? After that, nobody should be announcing any
prefixes with next hop in the old IP address range. Members should
make sure that they remove the secondary IP address after this date on
whatever maintenance window is required (again should be minimal
impact as this is now the secondary IP address).
Failure to remove the secondary could impact Airstream in the future
if they reassign these IP blocks, so this should be completed at some point.
Are their any concerns or questions about this schedule and plan?
Anything anybody would do differently?
Are the schedule dates reasonable?
Doug McIntyre <[log in to unmask]>
-- ipHouse/Goldengate/Bitstream/ProNS --
Network Engineer/Provisioning/Jack of all Trades
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: