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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gert Doering
gert at space.net
Wed Apr 15 15:51:41 CEST 2009
Hi, On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 02:57:40PM +0200, Ingrid Wijte wrote: > PDP Number: 2009-05 > Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs let me try to summarize the discussion so far: - (some/most) people acknowledge that there is a need for a number of network operators to run two distinct networks - for different reasons, be it "commercial" vs. "national research network", or be it "different country networks for large multinational ISPs". - the current policy doesn't permit a single LIR to receive multiple allocations (warning: an allocation can be bigger than a /32, so this needs to be taken into account in the wording) - the main issue right now seems to be the definition of criteria, under which circumstances a LIR can be eligible to receive further /32s - tieing this criteria to the 'the LIR has multiple AS numbers' is seen as problematic, because it could lead to "if we can't get the address space we want, we sneak it through the 'AS number' backdoor" I do not think that "waste of addresses" is the primary issue we should worry about, at least not when talking about a few thousand extra /32s (out of a billion). "Routing table slots" is something we need to be careful about, and "fairness and clear rules", and "make IPv6 workable". So I think this discussion should move towards: - find examples of networks that have problems with the current policy, and try to figure out common criteria - formulate criteria for "additional allocations" that can get (rough) consensus - re-word the policy proposal accordingly Gert Doering -- APWG chair -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 128645 SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] RE: Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]