[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] IPv6 access to K-root

On Thursday 24 February 2005 21:41, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> They need a /128.  But experience has shown that BGP participants *do*
> filter, and as such, it was decided to go for a /32 in RIPE land.  ARIN
> does /48s.
>
> > It would make sense to me if root servers were assigned directly from
> > RIPE (possibly from a special allocation set as side for the root
> > servers' use).

> But hey, so what.  There are roughly 4 billion /32s - what do you gain
> by saving 10 /32s?  The number of routing table entries (which are a
> larger problem than "exhaustion of the available /32s") doesn't change.

Hmm, I can't remember these days :) - but I bet many people said similar 
things about v4 addresses. OK, not 4 billion but you know what I mean.

>
> > Regardless of min allocation size - which ISP isn't going to allow an
> > known root server IP through. If people want to filter then let them, if
> > they don't know what they're doing then that's their look out.
> >
> > Root servers should be allocated/assigned (whatever) from a known block -
> > that way everyone knows not to filter that block.
>
> At the time the policy was written, people thought that this way would
> be better.  On the subject of root servers, people tend to be conservative.
>
> OTOH, no policy that can't be changed if people think otherwise today.

Yep, and that's the way it should be. Perhaps it's time to revist this policy.

At the end of the day, who should be hitting the roots ? - those people should 
have more than enough clue to filter correctly.

Perhaps it's time we stopped trying to make up for operators' shortcomings and 
let them be responsible for their own decisions.

Jon