[address-policy-wg] Proposal 2011-02 moving to Last Call

Dear address-policy-wg, Sander,

I'm glad to hear that a rough consensus has been achieved, and would like to
reaffirm my support for this policy proposal.

--
Respectfully yours,

David Monosov

On 09/23/2011 02:15 PM, Sander Steffann wrote:
> Hello working group,
> 
> After a extensive analysis of the discussions on the mailing list about proposal 2011-02 we have come to the conclusion that we have rough consensus on this policy proposal, and we have decided to move this policy proposal to Last Call.
> 
> We have seen much support for this proposal on the mailing list. On the other hand we have seen concern about accelerated growth of the routing table caused by implementing this policy. Data from other RIRs that have a more liberal IPv6 PI policy have not shown evidence for excessive growth in IPv6 PI assignments.  As of today, Sep 23, there are 2420 /48 routes in the global BGP table, compared to 3600 /32 routes and ~1100 routes of other prefix lengths. Based on this data we consider the arguments agains this proposal based on possible routing table growth as addressed. We will ask the RIPE NCC to ask for extensive documentation in the IPv6 PI request form about why IPv6 PI space is requested instead of PA space. The intention of this is to be able to analyze the reasons for organizations to request PI space and to make requesters think twice when requesting PI space. If this policy proposal has consensus at the end of Last Call we will also ask the RIPE NCC to monitor and
 regularly report on IPv6 PI assignment statistics so we can see if the number of PI requests runs out of bounds.
> 
> On behalf of the Address Policy WG chairs,
> Sander Steffann
>