On 6 August 2011 11:42, Erik Bais <ebais@a2b-internet.com> wrote:
I spoke with the AP-WG-chair last week and the decision is that there will be an extended review period to give people the time to ask questions if needed on the proposal.
I'm still of the opinion that removing the dual homing requirement for PI is a mistake. Having done some work on renumbering on IPv6, its much easier than v4 (assuming that you design the addressing to be portable) and not the barrier that people believe that it is with v4. Please feel free to correct my thinking but PA space is for LIRs to give to customers for their use, PI space is for those customers who require a separate block because they need to be 'independent' of their LIR. The only time this is required (afaict) is when the block *needs* to be routed by a third party for resilience and therefore needs to be multi-homed. By removing that requirement we are 'encouraging' the requisition of additional resources where non is required and increasing the size of the routing table unnecessarily. If there is another problem we are trying to solve (as in PI space not being suitable for sub-allocation) then we are trying to solve it the wrong way... J -- James Blessing 07989 039 476