[address-policy-wg] 2011-04 New Policy Proposal

On 10/28/11 11:01 AM, Ahmed Abu-Abed wrote:
> In reality RIPE will be giving up a finite resource for implementing one
> particular type of a transition protocol, i.e. 6rd.

Hi,

Arguably "infinite" resource. More towards "infinite" than to "finite" 
resource.

No. RIPE-NCC would be giving out resources, that people need to deploy 
IPv6, native or as a service.

>
> Can't the response be go back to your vendor and ask them to implement a
> different transition protocol that doesn't waste address space ? After
> all, there are many such protocols out there.

It surely can. Good luck with that :)

6RD is here, even chipset vendors are building HW acceleration support 
for it.

Again, to be clear, I'm not perfectly ok with 6RD, as it is resources 
wastefull mechanism and "wrong way of doing right thing" and we'll 
probably never use it in our country, but still, that's my personal 
opinion and has nothing to do with the fact, that it's being widely 
deployed or at least many of opers would deploy it today if they had the 
v6 resources to do that. But, hitting the HD ration bump for additional 
allocation seems to be the show-stopper for them.

Cheers, Jan