[address-policy-wg] 2023-01 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IXP IPv4 assignment default size to a /26)

Hi Nick,

> As far as I understand, this protocol is not widely deployed in IXPs,
> nor is it widely tested in inter-AS production environments. It would be
> concerning if an untested protocol were mandated as a production
> requirement in a RIR addressing policy document.

> Before continuing down this path, could the authors provide information
> on how this protocol works in production environments?

This part of the proposal is intended to foster the adoption of the technology.
IXPs may offer it as beta or experimental while still doing the actual exchange
of traffic via standard BGP over IPv4.

We are aware this is part controversial; we can remove it if the community thinks
this is a bad idea.

Matthias

--
Dr.-Ing. Matthias Wichtlhuber
Senior Researcher
------------------------------
DE-CIX Management GmbH
Lindleystr. 12, 60314 Frankfurt (Germany)
phone: +49 69 1730902 141
mobile: +49 171 3836036
fax: +49 69 4056 2716
e-mail: matthias.wichtlhuber at de-cix.net
web: www.de-cix.net
------------------------------
DE-CIX Management GmbH
Executive Directors: Ivaylo Ivanov and Sebastian Seifert
Trade registry: District court (Amtsgericht) Cologne, HRB 51135
Registered office: Lichtstr. 43i, 50825 Cologne
------------------------------
DE-CIX 25th anniversary: Without you the Internet would not be the same!
Join us on the journey at https://withoutyou.de-cix.net


________________________________________
Von: address-policy-wg <address-policy-wg-bounces at ripe.net> im Auftrag von Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org>
Gesendet: Dienstag, 7. Februar 2023 12:01:24
An: Angela Dall'Ara
Cc: RIPE Address Policy Working Group
Betreff: Re: [address-policy-wg] 2023-01 New Policy Proposal (Reducing IXP IPv4 assignment default size to a /26)

Angela Dall'Ara wrote on 09/01/2023 10:40:
> As per the RIPE Policy Development Process (PDP), the purpose of this
> four-week Discussion Phase is to discuss the proposal and provide
> feedback to the proposer.

not sure if this comment is in time, but the text contains:

> Assignments strictly larger than a /24 will only be made to IXPs that
> offer the exchange of IPv4 routing information over IPv6 at their
> route servers

As far as I understand, this protocol is not widely deployed in IXPs,
nor is it widely tested in inter-AS production environments. It would be
concerning if an untested protocol were mandated as a production
requirement in a RIR addressing policy document.

Before continuing down this path, could the authors provide information
on how this protocol works in production environments?

Nick

--

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://mailman.ripe.net/