[db-wg] Abuse-C/IRT

On Sun, 9 May 2004, Ulrich Kiermayr wrote:

> > I would urge you to reconsider. With IPv6 it is expected that almost all 
> > assignments to customers will actually be /48 as very very few customers
> > actually need anything more then that (even large companies that currently
> > might have /19 can be fine with /48 ip6). 
> 
> The problem is that IPSc could (and regarding what I hear would) give 
> out /48s to ther end users [if there is a chance they need more than one 
> subnet]. In our case you would probably end up with ~30000 /48 assigned 
> that way - and as a university we do not have that many DSL end-users.

In your case there is no need to actually provide whois reassignments
because the ips are still in use at the university (ok by its students) 
and it is the same with IPv4. Nor is there reason why large company would 
provide reassignments on each /48 for each of their employers. 

Deligations and reassignments to organizations different then the one that
received the ip block (from upstream or directly from RIR) or for personal
use by end-users (in that case meaning not for use to do business or other 
similar activity as part of the organization that received ip space) are 
the only ones I meant as those that are usefull to have in the whois
database. Their number would be in the same range of numbers as what is
currently entered in whois for IPv4.

> But what about the really big ISPs? At the moment the Ripe DB contains 
> slightly over 1.000.000 Objects. if those ISPs register every /48 they 
> assign, you end up with orders of magnitude more objects - and a 
> consderable higher update-rate.

I do not believe we have any reason to worry that number would be too 
high that RIRs would not be able to handle it as it would be the same
type of use as is currently entered in whois for IPv4 that are likely
to receive majority of assigned /48s (i.e. reassignments to bussiness
with multiple computer networks or to "well networked" homes).

Also technology capabilities are still increasing and current databases 
(as seen based on millions of domains in .com) are quite capable of 
handling large number of records. Additionally the RIR policies are not 
meant to be a fixed thing, if you do ever find out that load on whois 
database due to new records being entered in is growing at the rate too 
great that it might indanger stability of such database, then obvious 
reaction on part of RIR and its members would be to modify policies to 
eliminate this threat (i.e. remove those /48 records from public site then 
and remove need to enter any more of them). 
 
> The deeper reason is that the way IPv6 addresses are handed out and the 
> Space is devided, you can have end-users occupying the same IP space as 
> big companies.

If these end-users have large enough network that they need /48 on public
internet as does some large public company, then perhaps they should accept
responsibility that comes with it.

-- 
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william at elan.net