[lir-wg] IPv6 assignments to RIPE itself

>> Alexander Gall has summarized it pretty well - if we want to give out
>> /48s freely, then the quite conservative RIR->LIR allocation policy 
>> currently in place *hurts*.
>
>Very true if you mean that you cannot build a reasonable hierarchy.

  Actually, this is the thing that makes the use of the /42 block out of
  SURFnet's sTLA to RIPE (Meeting et.al.), The NCC and the employees
  interesting: I do see it as people actually trying to _live_ and
  document that hierarchy - LIR => RIPE NCC (status: ALLOCATED-BY-LIR) =>
  various assignments by the RIPE NCC.

>> As for the argument "are universities ISPs"?  Yes, at least over here,
>> a fair number of them are providing IP connectivity to the student's 
>> hostels via leased line/ethernet, and to all other students via ISDN/Modem
>> dialup.  So for all address management purposes, they are ISPs.
>
>This is true in the Netherlands too.

  Same here. We even operate our own ADSL gear on-site for connecting
  hostels, students, etc.

>Yes, I think those should be treated
>as ISPs, probably getting a prefix (>> /48) from their NRN.

  That's something we are trying to get a feeling for at the moment.
  My approach for _now_ is to treat a University's (extended) LAN as one
  site (i.e. lives within 1 /48), and the hostels and remote customers'
  (students and faculty) networks as a site (/48 typically or /64 in
  special circumstances) each.

  As regards the address distribution procedures I still maintain that
  there is no technical or logical difference between a university's
  "customer" which happens to be staff or student as compared to a
  "regular" customer serviced by a "commercial" ISP.

  Also, the technology used to ship IPv6 packets should be irrelevant for
  this discussion, i.e. a native link or an IPv6 in IPv4 tunnel to such a
  network doesn't make a difference.

>	rvdp

  Btw, regarding the discussion of what a "site" is - my current
  interpretation here is that a "site" is the entity I am talking to
  with regard to network planning and address space management. And if
  that entity most probably uses more than a singel subnet, then I usually
  stick to the /48 recommendation.



  Wilfried.
 _________________________________:_____________________________________
  Wilfried Woeber                 : e-mail: Woeber at CC.UniVie.ac.at
  UniVie Computer Center - ACOnet : Tel: +43 1 4277 - 140 33
  Universitaetsstrasse 7          : Fax: +43 1 4277 - 9 140
  A-1010 Vienna, Austria, Europe  : RIPE-DB: WW144, PGP keyID 0xF0ACB369
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~