On Wed, 6 Apr 2005 01:48:23 +0300 (EEST), Pekka Savola wrote:
Why do you think you require a /32 to "promote IPv6". Don't answer.. it was a rhetoric question :) No, it isn't rhetoric.
For our company we require a *unique* *globally* and under our AS with definition of an AS ("own policy") routable address space. I don't care about the exact size. However I do care that it should be independent from other ISP's and upstreams as the market laws make everything else very bad. We cannot afford giving up the competition between suppliers for our upstream traffic and we cannot afford giving up the investments in connection to internet exchanges and to become dependent from the mercy of a single supplier. Thus I can clearly tell you that without independently routable address space we will not introduce IPv6 within our network. Period. Which means no IPv6 reachability for serveral well known services. And as no customer is asking for it it won't come up.
My own, small consulting company (with dozens of customers) can certainly promote v6, but I have no delusions of grandeour that it would be best from the global perspective to allow such or even larger companies, whether calling themselves ISPs or not, to obtain a /32. *Please* *do math*.
You probably do this when you provide consulting, too ? A /32 is the 0.000 000 000 233 part of the IPv6 address space. This is what *anyone* who asks and who don't asks receives as a mininmum assignment today because this is exactly the equivalent of *one IPv4 address* and is *required* to provide a full service connection to the internet. And thus it should be affordable to give this size to a company *providing ISP services to customers*.
Is a bit of unselfishness too much to ask ? No, and you got the answer.
Best Regards Oliver Oliver Bartels F+E + Bartels System GmbH + 85435 Erding, Germany oliver@bartels.de + http://www.bartels.de + Tel. +49-8122-9729-0