[lir-wg] IPv6 assignments to RIPE itself

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 03:10:23PM +0100, Ronald van der Pol wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 14:49:37 +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
> 
> > The other point is that one of the main arguments in that RFC is "if a
> > customer changes ISPs, they will always get the same size prefix (a /48)",
> > which is just not working if customers can very liberally get more than
> > a /48 to account for "another-level-down end sites".  So we're back to
> > the address space haggling days, just argueing about the number of /48s
> > instead the number of single IPs.
> 
> I don't agree. It's not just a customer. It's an ISP. If an ISP wants
> to switch from upstream provider, that's a big job. And some negotiation
> about prefix delegation is part of that.
>
> _End_ customers will get a /48. If they change ISP, they get a /48 again.
> 
> Really big enterprise (end) customers with two or three /48s are not
> guaranteed to get the same amount of /48s from a new ISP. But I guess
> they will have a strong negotiating position.

Just calling those parties ISPs will not solve the dilemma.   A big company
that wants to give IP connectivity to their employees (like the RIPE NCC
does) is not an "ISP" in the classic sense, as it's not their main 
business.

On the other hand, if you call everybody that happens to offer an ISDN S0
for dialup to their employees purposes an ISP, then most of our business 
customers could be called ISPs - which defeats the "one /48 for end sites" 
rule again.

Of course there are some customers that make their money doing ISP business 
(that is: give paying customers who are different legal entities (!) access 
to the internet), and I have no problem with them getting a /36 or whatever.

The problem is the class of customers like the RIPE NCC.

> > So I still think that the concept of "one /48 for each site" without a 
> > proper definition of "site" is flawed.  And yes, it's arguably pretty
> > impossible to give a working definiton.
> 
> Yes, that's true. But "end customer" <--> "ISP" relations are pretty
> clear. Those will have /48 assignments.

Well, for those "end customers" that are "end customers", assigning them
a /48 is covered pretty clearly by the current policy.

I still don't think that it's very easy to define a given business
relation as "this is an end-end-end customer", and "that is an ISP".

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  55593  (55180)

SpaceNet AG                 Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299