[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Who provides v6 uplink via tunnel ?

On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 13:16 +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:01:58PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> > if you are a not at an IX yet I would really
> > start to question the IPv6 address request procedures...
> 
> I can't follow you here.  The IPv6 allocation policies are not tied to
> technical infrastructure requirements, and that's a good thing - we *want*
> smaller ISPs to be able to get an IPv6 allocation, even if they can't
> reasonably warrant to connect to a major IX.  Especially as upstream 
> prices tend to be cheaper these days than just the access link to an IX,
> unless you happen to sit in the same city...

Usually, afaik, ISP's are already at an IX and also have their upstreams
there and are mostly operating from a colo close to that IX, thus being
at an IX also directly makes one have multiple upstreams and thus at
least one of them having IPv6 connectivity available.

Greets,
 Jeroen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 240 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20050522/6df5d16e/attachment.sig>