[ipv6-wg] Re: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Andre's guide to fix IPv6

On 1 dec 2005, at 11.44, Cameron C. Gray wrote:

> Per Heldal wrote:
>> Shim6 is work in progress and may be used as an argument to adjust
>> adress-assignment policies sometime in the future. If we want ipv6
>> deployed today we have to provide a mechanism to support requirements
>> about redundancy and independence from individual providers.
>
> I think this hit the nail on the head.  Providers (especially those
> non-LIR) will not accept something along the lines of SHIM6 or  
> A.N.Other
> competing idea until it gives them just that -- INBOUND ROUTING
> INDEPENDENCE.

Now you are mixing two issues that Per separated though. Per pointed  
out that shim6 is work in progress while we need a policy now.

> My view is relatively simple; either give everyone who wants one  
> and has
> an AS-Number a /32 or allow /48s into the backbone table.  This is of
> course if we actually want to give up using IPv4; without the above  
> most
> providers will see it as a step backward and a bad thing (tm).

I think each LIR should get a /32 and we should drop the 200  
"customer" rule.  But that is just me...

- kurtis -