[address-policy-wg] Re: getting second IPv6 PA as a LIR

Hi,

On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 09:41:55PM +0200, Daniel Roesen wrote:
> Assuming LIRs are generally businesses (first order approximation), LIRs
> seem to be totally fine to pay for hardware to support all their
> competitors DFZ deaggregation pollution.
> 
> I'm missing any call to arms to get THAT in check.

Different orders of magnitude.  How many "ISP-like" operations can you 
have, and how many "just end users" can you have?

So what we have tried to work for is a reasonable(*) balance - that 
end users *can* have independent address space, but not all end users
would actually *want* it.

To stress the obvious: not all "end users" are identical - there's "medium 
sized businesses" and "my mom's computer at home".  I don't think my mom 
should have PI addresses being globally visible in the DFZ...  (and as
far as I remember, Daniel's employer isn't offering to route PI addresses
to their customer base either).

Just something to keep in mind.

Gert Doering
	APWG chair

(*) reasonable = some think it's too loose, others think it's too strict,
but generally mostly workable and nothing has exploded yet
-- 
did you enable IPv6 on something today...?

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