This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Marco Hogewoning
marcoh at marcoh.net
Tue Jan 15 17:38:29 CET 2008
On Jan 15, 2008, at 5:35 PM, <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote: >> In addition, this policy proposal is suggesting that RIPE should >> lie to > all the End Users in the database and tell them that IPv6 is ready for > deployment just because they now have some shiny new numbers in their > RIPE database entry. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even > though > my company already has commercial IPv6 customers on our network, we > would > not know what to do with a flood of requests from people who think > that > IPv6 Internet access is easy if you have a number. > > IPv6 Internet access in Europe in early 2008 is hard. Lack of address > assignments is not a barrier to making IPv6 Internet access work. The > real barriers can be found by reading through some of the pages at > <http://www.getipv6.info/> such as the one on First Steps for ISPs > <http://www.getipv6.info/index.php/First_Steps_for_ISPs> > > or Transparent Internet Access > <http://www.getipv6.info/index.php/Transparent_Internet_Access> > > Accepting a proposal like this would send entirely the wrong message > and > could only delay the deployment of IPv6 while we try to do damage > control. I totally agree on this one, it's not that we haven't got the space to supply our customers with v6 addresses, we simply can't provision at the moment, at least not for a large chunk of our customer base. Before I start any work myself, does anybody have the statistics on hand on how many end-users (routes) we are talking about ? -- MarcoH
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2008-01 New Policy Proposal (Assigning IPv6 PI to Every Inetnum Holder)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]