Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:12:40 -0500 From: Keng Soon Goh <KengSoon.Goh@hughes.com> To: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.org" <freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Issue with IPv6 address for www.freebsd.org Message-ID: <CD53A815.60F04%kengsoon.goh@hughes.com> In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1v71bZWxQOLn5pQijDPX-urSJfuknRVCK-bz3Vg0x1GgQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kevin,
I talked to Level3 and they said Yahoo should have not use this subnet beca=
use belongs to Level3. So, I believe they are contacting Yahoo on this. Bas=
ically yahoo is illegally using Level3 subnet. If you go to ARIN, this subn=
et belongs to Level3, and not Yahoo.
Thanks.
Keng
From: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com<mailto:rkoberman@gmail.com>>
Date: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 12:09 PM
To: Keng Soon Goh <KengSoon.Goh@hughes.com<mailto:KengSoon.Goh@hughes.com>>
Cc: "freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.org<mailto:freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.org>" <freebsd-=
gnome@freebsd.org<mailto:freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org>>
Subject: Re: Issue with IPv6 address for www.freebsd.org
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 5:44 AM, Keng Soon Goh <KengSoon.Goh@hughes.com<mai=
lto:KengSoon.Goh@hughes.com>> wrote:
Kevin,
I found the issue. It is on Level3. Level3 gave away two /48 IPv6 subnet to=
his client, but when in their network, they summaries the subnet to /32. I=
do not believe they advertised out to the whole world an existing /48. I w=
orked with another upstream provider whom their upstream is Level3, and the=
y said they only see one /32. So, whoever use Level3 as their upstream prov=
ider will have issue accessing to these IPv6 subnet. I already worked with =
Level3 yesterday evening on this.
* 2001:1900::/32 2001:1890:FF:FFFF:12:122:125:6
0 7018 3356 i
* 2001:1900:2254::/48
2001:1890:FF:FFFF:12:122:125:6
0 7018 6939 1031=
0 i
* 2001:1900:2262::/48
2001:1890:FF:FFFF:12:122:125:6
0 7018 6453 2177=
5 i
Glad you at least understand the issue. Now, if it can just get fixed.
Before I retired I knew enough senior people at L3 to get it fixed quite ea=
sily. now they have mostly moved on and I'm quite unsure.
This is why I hate punching holes in network blocks...either IPv4 or IPv6. =
It's too easy to forget and put in some filter, static or policy that break=
s the net for those holes if they are announced to peers other than the own=
er of the block. I always recommend that specific blocks for use as PI addr=
esses be set up so that this does not happen and I am surprised that L3 dis=
not do this for IPv6.
I'll drop a note to my successor who maintains good contacts with senior ro=
uting people and is also a strong proponent of IPv6. L3 is also their fiber=
provider, so they deal with a different part of L3 quite a bit.
As use of IPv6 grows, these problems will become rate as they will result i=
t trouble calls much more quickly and in larger numbers.
--
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com<mailto:rkoberman@gmail.com>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CD53A815.60F04%kengsoon.goh>