Hi, On Mon, Jun 21, 2004 at 07:04:28PM +0100, Sascha Luck wrote:
On Monday 21 June 2004 18:31, Gert Doering wrote:
If you estimate that you will continue to be very small, you could use a /40 or such from one of your upstream ISPs (which is a problem *today*, as there are not enough upstream ISPs, indeed).
I could get native IPv6 connectivity from 3 upstreams today (OK, only from 2 for commercial purposes). TTBOMK, no multihoming facility exists without your own /32 allocation (considering aggregation, probably just as well).
As of today, multihoming with a more-specific from one of your upstreams will work - using the classic BGP multihoming approach. I don't know what the multi6 WG will come up with in the end, but can't really imagine that there is something else which will work for an ISP.
If you are in good hope to reach more than 200 customers, you fulfill the criteria (as has been mentioned before).
Of course, I'm in good hope of reaching that goal. If that's good enough, fine but how do I document this hope? Will the NCC take my word for it? ;)
They have to :-) - in the last 5 years, hardly anybody could be *sure* to have 200 IPv6 customers after two years - but unless you are sure that you won't reach that goal (due to your customer structure, whatever) the underlying goal is "optimism and get IPv6 rolled out". [..]
Quite a number of people from various regions insisted on it, at that time, for fear of a "landrush" or "routing table explosion" (routing table slots *are* a scarce resource indeed, but changing this policy to "every LIR in existance today gets one" won't hurt *that* much).
Well the landslide hasn't happened as far as I can see :) Even though I'd love to see it happen.
Things are moving, and I think the current pace isn't too bad. Too fast will not necessarily help...
The routing table does need to be considered, but it still is IMO a technical problem. Although it seems there is a shift in v4 policies away from aggregation in favour of conservation (no more reservations for contiguous address space, etc)
Let's not discuss IPv4 policy in this thread (but I agree). [..]
So shall we abandon it? In favour of *what* to replace it?
My proposal would be similar to the ARIN (I think) one: Any LIR in good standing is entitled to a /32 with justification for any follow-up allocation.
Well, initially all regions had the "200 customers" rule (which made the whole process difficult, because the goal was a *global* policy). I need to check whether this has changed recently in one of the other regions. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 60210 (58081) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299