[address-policy-wg] 2014-04 New Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Relaxing IPv6 Requirement for Receiving Space from the Final /8)

[ I am aware of the off-topic-ness, and belated on top, but... ]

Daniel Baeza (Red y Sistemas TVT) wrote:

[....]
> Easy. The current IPv6 deploy makes me cry like a little girl. NOBODY
> (as percentage) is deploying it in their customer/backone/whatever network.

... even if stated again and again, it simply is not true. Please stop
these claims, they may be even more detrimental to IPv6 deployment, if
read by some people not having "real data" and/or first-hand experience.

> If we want to migrate from v4 to v6, some drastic changes should be
> made. One of them, requiring the v6 to be publicly visible if you want
> to have the last /22.
> 
> That way we ensure that LIR/Network will have, 'at least', ipv6 working
> on the router.

No, just a config line in some (potentially unrelated) box announcing the
prefix from a random AS#.

> Its sad we cant check deeper if clients/servers/etc is having v6
> conectivity

God havens, I am grateful that you/we can't. It is nobody's business to
try to poke around.

> but at least we can check if v6 is public in bgp.

As it has been pointed out already, IPv6 addressing is a *technology* that
can be used in different environments. The capital "i" Internet is one of
them. And even there, not *all* announcements that are made somewhere by a
BGP speaker can be seen everywhere in the DFZ (or by the RIPE NCC's RIS).

Wilfried.

>>> How? Making the policy not only "to have" the v6 alloc, I'll require
>>> also having it with route6 and published in BGP. RIPEstat is a good
>>> tool to check if the v6 is publicly visible.
>>
>>
>> IP addresses allocated/assigned do not have to be routed on 'the
>> global internet' (for whatever value of 'global internet' you pick).
>> Routing requirements were explicitly removed from the IPv6 policy with
>> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2009-06.
> 
> 
> So please, tell me why someone will require/request public ip space if
> is not to be publicly routed on "the global internet".
> And that is a real question since I saw that "IP addresses
> allocated/assigned do not have to be routed on 'the global internet"
> several times and cant understand why.
> 
> Cheers,