[address-policy-wg] Status of 2011-02 Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)?

On Mon, 8 Aug 2011, DI. Thomas Schallar wrote:

> So as long as there is PI available, you need technological solutions to 
> make it work. Of course I see the problems with growing routing tables. 
> But customers do need PI so they will apply for PI and therefore the 
> routing tables are growing. So you need a solution. And - sorry - it's 
> no solution to just make it complicated/expensive and save the real 
> solution for later.

I don't agree. Time is money, and having a procedure that requires hours 
to handle to get PI is a reasonable barrier of entry to start using this 
global resource.

Personally was inclined to apply for AS, PIv4 and PIv6, but after spending 
30 minutes on the application documents, I grew tired and stopped. I'm a 
router guy, I don't really appreciate paperwork.

I think the current state of affairs is ok, I support changing the 
multihomed requirement for IPv6 as per this proposal, but I still feel the 
situation needs to be monitored and there needs to be a yearly review 
regarding how many new PI applications are approved, and if it looks like 
a exponential growth, then it needs to be curbed somehow. Right now there 
are no facts to support this change growth, but I still fear there might 
be a change in growth rate if the rules are changed so that it becomes 
really easy to get PI addresses.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se