This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments): discussion in the IPv6-WG mailing list
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments): discussion in the IPv6-WG mailing list
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Marco Hogewoning
marcoh at marcoh.net
Fri Sep 3 21:20:59 CEST 2010
Oh and could people at least cross-post ? On 3 sep 2010, at 21:13, Marco Hogewoning wrote: > > On 3 sep 2010, at 17:30, Sander Steffann wrote: > >> Hi, >> >>>> A new policy proposal, 2010-06, "Registration Requirements for IPv6 End >>>> User Assignments", was published to the IPv6 Working Group mailing list today. >>> >>> I think I like this policy, mostly. >>> >>> The only issue I have is that it appears to mandate that all assignments makes from a SUB-ASSIGNED PA block are exactly the length specified. This means that if the ISP has policies of, say, /56 for most customers but /48 for some, while at the same time wanting to implement some form of per-PoP prefix aggregation, it means assigning multiple blocks per aggregation point, one per assignment size. >> >> Allowing multiple "assignment-size:" fields might solve that. > > No it won't, you have a /40 with assignment size /56 and /64 and then how to specify which customer has what. Can't we solve this by allowing more specifics ? > > The original thought was to just create multiple entries, one for each assignment size. But we could allow for something like: > > bla:://40 -> assignment size /48 > bla::1/48 -> assignment size /56 > > MarcoH > MarcoH
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments)
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] Re: [address-policy-wg] 2010-06 New Policy Proposal (Registration Requirements for IPv6 End User Assignments): discussion in the IPv6-WG mailing list
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]