<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style></style></head><body lang=FI link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Hi,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>As far as I’m concerned, there seems to be a strange discrepancy between IPv4 PI and IPv6 PI. Apparently Janne has already successfully obtained IPv4 PI and has now requested IPv6 PI, declaring the same intended use. Could someone please point out where in the policy documents it says one can use IPv4 PI for hosting, but not IPv6 PI? I’m having a hard time finding such terms.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>____________________________________<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Tero Toikkanen<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Nebula Oy</span><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt'><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net [mailto:address-policy-wg-admin@ripe.net] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Jan Tuomi<br><b>Sent:</b> 30. maaliskuuta 2011 11:25<br><b>To:</b> address-policy-wg@ripe.net<br><b>Subject:</b> [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI request is turned down for my multihomed hosting facility - Why?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Hi,<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>A have made a request for a IPv6 PI / 48 allocation for my hosting facility.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I am mostly hosting shared services, but I also have a lot of Co-located services for my customers.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I am already multihomed to have redundancy from two ISPs for IPv4 and I am going to setup the IPv6 Network the same way.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>My ASN is 196704, and I am multihoming trough IP-Only (AS12552) and Telenor (AS8434).<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>My sponsoring LIR says that I can get an assignment from their PA-space right away, BUT then I would not be multi-homed, so that is NOT an option.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>The answer I get from you (RIPE) is:<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><i>You mentioned that several of the subnets will be used to provide services to your customers (LEON Hosting, Co-location/Dedicated servers). </i><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><i>Unfortunately current IPv6 address assignment and allocation policy does not permit the use of IPv6 PI address space for these services. </i><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><i>At this time IPv6 PI address space cannot be used for any service where a customer would receive a subnet of IP space (including a single IP). Therefore it cannot be used for colocation services, dedicated servers, SSL certificates etc. </i><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><i>There is currently a discussion on exactly this subject within the RIPE community. Ventiro AB are welcome to sign up for the mailing list and join the discussion. You can find the mailing list here:<br><a href="http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/ripe-lists/address-policy-wg">http://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/ripe-lists/address-policy-wg</a></i><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>I need to be multihomed because i feel its safer to have redandancy from separate upstreams with separate infrastructure than buying the redundancy from one provider.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>My business is to keep servers running in my hosting facility, part of them owned by me, part of them owned by the customers.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Some servers are shared among several customers, some are dedicated to one customer only.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>With todays technology as far as I know I must have separate IPs for SSL-enabled services.<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>Is it RIPEs hidden agenda to put small hosting facilitys out of business with IPv6 and force all customers to use the bigger ISPs?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>When I requested my IPv4 PI allocation, I was already planning to also run with IPv6 to be prepared for the future and somehow try to help with the transition to IPv6, so people dont have the arguments that we dont use IPv6 because there is no services, its now so much services from a global point of view, but it wouldnt be IPv4 only....<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>So what should I do? What are my options?<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> // Janne<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>_______________________ V E N T I R O ______<br>Janne Tuomi, <a href="mailto:tuomi@ventiro.se">tuomi@ventiro.se</a><br>Tel: +46-11-36 52 00<br>GSM: +46-70-224 6000<br>Fax: +46-11-36 52 05<o:p></o:p></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>