Hi, On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 04:21:33PM +0100, Elmar K. Bins wrote:
Maybe end sites need to be classified further. But then...let's await future discussions on the matter; I don't like preaching to walls, so maybe somebody else can turn the walls into something softer :-)
So far, nobody has proposed a "globally visible v6 to <important end sites>" policy yet. People are clearly unhappy, and blaiming policies, but are not making specific proposals. One could start with the "critical infrastructure" policy from ARIN, but I keep saying that Google is much more critical to the average network user than one specific nameserver out of the NS set of a random ccTLD registry... Most large enterprises will think of themselves as much more important than anybody else. So it's not easy to come up with a set of rules "who is permitted to announce a globally visible prefix and who isn't". Nils seems to aim for "everybody is", which is something I'm afraid of... (and I don't see that "vendors will deliver routers that can handle $Billions of routes" anytime soon, seeing that vendors are still shipping "top of the line" products that can't do more than 256k IPv4 prefixes). OTOH, one might see this "IPv6 deployment isn't happening because we can't get addresses!!!" as a pretty lame excuse - /48 multihoming has serious problems, but if you really *want* to get started with IPv6, it works, for the time being. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 71007 (66629) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234