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

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 09:02:06AM -0700, Leo Vegoda wrote:
> On 15/04/2009 2:34, "Marco Hogewoning" <marcoh at marcoh.net> wrote:
> > Let's assume you have a seperate entity in your company, which
> > operates in a different geographical region under it's own AS and
> > routing policy. Only one company (the holding for instance) is an LIR
> > in the  current situation.
> > 
> > How do you solve this at the moment iin IPv4-land ?
> 
> Good question. Isn't the normal answer to open a separate LIR for the
> separate business unit?

Sometimes it is not that case. For example, there could be one entity
(LIR) which serves with the same staff (one business unit; limited
resources) both commercial and academic customers using different boxes,
IPs and ASes and (sometimes the most important) funds, which (all) due
to whatever reason(s) which is beyond the scope of this thread, could
not be mixed together. Opening a separate LIR is either an abuse of
current policy (*) or unnecessary waste of time and money.

(*) And let me remind that this abuse is necessary only for ipv6 (which
we should promote). It seems that in ipv4 world people either do filters
based on route objects or use fixed /24 size. Both options give some
flexibility in announcing routes smaller then allocation.

Piotr

-- 
gucio -> Piotr Strzyżewski
E-mail: Piotr.Strzyzewski at polsl.pl