[lir-wg] IPv6 assignments to RIPE itself

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.

> 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.

	rvdp