[address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)

Remco van Mook wrote:
>
> Hang on a second. This is now devolving into a proposal where you can
> get a separate AS and /32 for every customer your LIR serves and I
> will definitely not support that. I want a pony, too.
>
> Remco

But I do not need any new AS.The current policy for getting AS number is
fine for me!
I only need to announce a "production quality" IPv6 allocation which is
/32 within each AS I have. And I am in ONE geographical location. Can
this policy take care of me (and not only me)?
So I only recommend to remove this statement about "unconnected
geographical areas" because this reflect only some too narrow LIRs'
situation.

Best regards,
Bartek
>
> On 15-04-09 10:08, "Bartek Gajda" <gajda at man.poznan.pl> wrote:
>
>     Marco Hogewoning wrote:
>     >
>     > On 14 apr 2009, at 14:57, Ingrid Wijte wrote:
>     >
>     >> PDP Number: 2009-05
>     >> Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs
>     >>
>     >> Dear Colleagues
>     >>
>     >> A new RIPE Policy Proposal has been made and is now available for
>     >> discussion.
>     > Summary of Proposal:
>     > This is a proposal to allow an LIR operating separate networks in
>     > unconnected geographical areas to receive multiple /32 IPv6
>     allocations.
>
>     This policy is a must-have policy for hundreds of thousand users in my
>     county and more than 20 LIRs. However there is a strong limitation for
>     me in this policy, because we are using at least two different
>     policies
>     but within ONE single geographical areas. The differences in routing
>     policies are not because of different geographical areas but
>     because of
>     different kind of customers we are serving.
>     Currently we have to divide single /32 into multiple pieces and
>     announce
>     them under different ASs we have, which weak but the only possible
>     solution. We do not have any chance to get a second /32 from RIPE
>     so far.
>
>     It would be really helpful to reflect this real life situation in
>     single
>     policy like this one. So after removing the part about "different
>     unconnected geographical areas" this policy will get strong
>     support from
>     LIRs I'm writing about.
>
>     Best regards,
>     Bartek Gajda
>
>
>
>
> This email is from Equinix Europe Limited or one of its
> associated/subsidiary companies. This email, and any files transmitted
> with it, contains information which is confidential, may be legally
> privileged and is solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you
> have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete
> this email immediately.  Equinix Europe Limited. Registered Office:
> Quadrant House, Floor 6, 17 Thomas More Street, Thomas More Square,
> London E1W 1YW. Registered in England and Wales No. 6293383.
>