[address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting

Sander,

I agree with you on the interpretation. We are facing a similar situation where our customer is in the security business. They host several hundred alarm receivers currently on ipv4 pi space. This is all their own infrastructure and the reason for pi space is the requirement for global unique addressing on the alarm receivers since they are connected to both the Internet and many vpns. Being provider independent brings them the ability to dual home in the future without renumbering as well as switch ISP all together. However since they do not dual home at the moment under the current policy they cannot get ipv6 pi space. Pa space is not an option since over 120000 alarm senders deployed at their end customers nationally would have to be reprogrammed in case of a change in connectivity.

Would you agree with me that in this scenario the use of pi space is warranted yet strictly speaking not allowed under the current policy?

Jasper
________________________________________
From: address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net [address-policy-wg-admin at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Sander Steffann [sander at steffann.nl]
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 6:04 PM
To: Mathieu Paonessa
Cc: address-policy-wg at ripe.net
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting

Hi,

> The company requesting the IPv6 PI is a hosting company providing
> software as a service solution for its customers. All the infrastructure
> (servers, routers...) is owned by them. For security reasons, they chose
> to isolate each of their customers on a separate VLAN. Their customer
> don't have administrative access to the servers and just uses the
> software hosted on them for their CRM, extranet or other corporate
> applications.
>
> Would you consider this to be the exact same case as an ISP assigning an
> IP to a customer's CPE?

No. This all sounds like their own infrastructure/network/equipment. That they run software for customers, and that they choose a certain numbering plan shouldn't make a difference here. When they provide network services to their customer it starts to become more complicated, but this doesn't sound like a problem for IPv6 PI space to me. (based on the given information of course. I'm not trying to tell an IPRA what to do... They might have based their evaluation on different information)

But the way you describe it it does not sound like they assign address space to other organizations. It sounds like they assign address space to parts of their own server farm.

But this is my personal interpretation of the current policy. If someone disagrees with this, please speak up!
Sander




Op dit e-mailbericht is een disclaimer van toepassing, welke te vinden is op http://www.espritxb.nl/disclaimer