[address-policy-wg] IPv6 allocations for 6RD

On Fri, 27 Nov 2009, Andre Chapuis wrote:

> I fully agree with Marc: the policy currently allows allocating more than 
> /32, so I see no need to change it.
>
> We are facing here a principle discussion.
> - the "R" in 6RD stays for "Rapid". And this is the most important point to 
> consider. If we can rapidly bring millions of users to IPv6 without investing 
> in big hardware/design changes (part. in these crisis times), combined with 
> guys like Google/Youtube bringing traffic, then (and only then) v6 will 
> become a reality.
> So this is in the interest of the RIPE community to make that happens. We 
> have a successful POC with Free.fr

Wrong: You need 6RD capable SOHO router. Free could dot it easily since 
Free is the owner and maintainer of the SOHO routers. The customers only 
leasing their CPEs. If your business modell is not similar you need big 
hardware changes....


>
> - For the RIPE-NCC, this is imho even more important to push for v6 
> deployment and therefore to remove any potential obstacle for the ISPs and 
> encourage them to implement 6-RD or similar solutions.
> If even getting IPv6 addresses becomes a fight, most ISPs may give up, since 
> there is still no business case to justify it.


No fight for getting IPv6 address: simple rules, If you are a LIR just 
read them, and fill out the form.

Best Regards,
 	Janos Mohacsi