[address-policy-wg] IPv6 assignment for the RIPE meeting network

[nasty email following, partially nice at the end]

Andrei Robachevsky wrote:
[..]
> IPv6 address space assignment for RIPE Meetings
> ---------------------------------------
> 
> A dedicated IPv6 prefix is assigned to the organisation that organises
> the RIPE Meetings. The size of this prefix is a /48 and the assignment
> will be valid as long as the organisation is responsible for organising
> the RIPE Meetings and the usage of the prefix is limited to RIPE Meeting
> networks.
> 
> The status of this assignment will be 'ASSIGNED MEETING’ in the RIPE
> Database and must be returned to the RIPE NCC if not in use for RIPE
> Meeting networks.

Wow, that will really make RIPE special wouldn't it? A special status,
just for RIPE. How much time will the Database team need to fix that up
in the code of the whois server, and how many external tools need to be
updated to handle that special status?

[..]
> Today a permanent IPv6 prefix is a necessity to be able to provide a
> stable and high quality service during RIPE Meetings.

You mean to say that the networks where RIPE meetings was making use of
before where unstable and of bad quality?

> Having such a
> permanent and dedicated prefix, the RIPE Meeting Team of the RIPE NCC
> will be able to design and test the RIPE meeting network beforehand,

Which is of course not possible when I tell you several months in
advance (I guess you need to book hotels, meeting rooms etc way in
advance thus you know where you are going to) that your prefix is going
to be 2001:db8:b4d:1dea::/48* that you can't "test" with that?

> which will ensure stable operation of the IPv6 network during the RIPE
> Meetings. This will also allow the team to have complete control over
> the network to effectively address issues related to security,

Because you can't firewall on another prefix nor can the /48 be properly
entered in the RIPE db so that it contains proper contact info.

> redundancy and setting efficient routing policies with third parties.

because you just want to fill up the routing table with /48's...
And people will have to punch a special hole in their prefix filters for
this exact prefix all of a sudden. Wow that really makes you special.

It seems to me that RIPE NCC is making this big case for "IPv6 PI",
wonderful.

> The proposal is worded in a way that the IPv6 prefix will be provided to
> the RIPE Meeting organiser. This is to ensure that the prefix will stay
> with the meeting organiser for the sole usage in RIPE meetings. This
> means if the RIPE NCC ceases being the RIPE Meeting organiser in the
> future, the prefix will be returned to the free pool.

(I guess you would mean that if the "Meeting Organiser" changes that the
prefix would go to the new one, and when "RIPE meetings" end that the
prefix will be returned to the free pool)

> The reason for the size being set to a /48 is about routing reasons.

I thought that prefixes where allocated based on address space need.
Though a /48 is of course a site, which makes it the minimum allocation
size, which would be more or less a valid reason, still it isn't.

> Because this is the minimum excepted routable assignment size that is
> common among all regions, we think a prefix in this size will guarantee
> connectivity during RIPE Meetings.

Non-sense, if your prefix is worthy enough (aka the content or you pay
them enough) people will route it, whatever the size it is.

> b. Arguments opposing the proposal
> 
> Some may argue that this will cause waste of address space because the
> prefix will be only in use effectively during RIPE meeting

And what about every other "meeting", I tend to have "meetings" at my
home, you know "Whisky Meetings", can I get a special free PI block for
that too. More seriously, will this also work for IETF, CCC, What The
Hack, LanPartyXYZ, etc etc etc. Most of these setup their network a week
in advance, as they also need to do a lot of other things to get things
working properly, maybe that is the way to go for RIPE meetings?


Thus, if there is going to be a 'meeting policy' then it should be well
defined and very generic and also allow every other "Meeting" to make
use of it, even if the event is a one-timer. And as we have End-user/LIR
payment now, somebody has to foot the bill for them too.

Greets,
 Jeroen

* = too many bits in network on purpose

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20081119/546d8ef4/attachment.sig>