how 200 /48's fails the job [Re: [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #gamma IPv6 Initial Allocation Criteria]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Oliver Bartels" <oliver at bartels.de>


> There is one point I don't understand in the whole discussion:
> If every RIPE member get's an IPv6 prefix, which is true for IPv4,
> we are talking about plus 10K prefixes in the table.
>
> This is *nothing* compared to a single de-aggregation action
> of clueless over-the-ocean ISP's which indeed happend
> and is *proven* to be managable by the existing routers.
>
> Thus *there is no technical reason at all* to keep the rule
> and force smaller ISP's to promise "plans" that won't get
> reality or put them as "second class" RIPE members into
> some sort of dependency of an larger RIPE member.
> There is also *enough* IPv6 address space,
> the IPv6 was designed that way.
>
> * I like clear words:
>
> If there is no technical reason at all, could one of the promoters
> of the 200 customers pseudo rule please explain the *true*
> reasons for this "we simply don't like this" opposition.
>

Hi
I don't think anyone can give you a good reason.

There is no such thing as technical limitations/reasons, only economical.
I don't see an economical reason for why normal network providers shouldn't 
be able to handle 500,000 IPv6 routes. Very many more routes than the 150k 
of today will increase the cost of equipment. Which firms would this affect 
the most, the smaller or the larger ones? I believe equally, but the initial 
cost of setting up multihoming would surely increase in the long run. 
Existing operators may need to upgrade something or they have to downgrade 
to singlehoming if they do not wish to upgrade. With that in mind, isn't 
this what you are looking for: A natural way to limit the amount of 
multihomed autonomous systems/amount of prefixes without enforcing 
unreasonable policies? As for scaling I am sure this will scale fine until 
next IP and/or routing protocol.
Allocate today, let the economics do all the work tomorrow. IPv6 won't 
survive if you keep having silly policies (and I still think that includes 
the fixed size /48 customer assignment policy).


Joergen Hovland ENK