Gert Doering wrote:

Hi,

On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 11:27:32AM +0100, Cameron Gray (RIPE Address Policy WG) wrote:

...

Or are we lobbying for the criteria as a LIR to be relaxed...?

Actually there are no big hurdles for becoming a LIR. Prove your existance, fill in paperwork, pay startup fee, done.

I think my phrasing was misunderstood. What I meant was the 200 rule, not to become a de facto LIR.

This alone doesn't give you an IPv6 allocation yet, though - the biggest hurdle there is that you have to claim a plan to supply 200 customers with IPv6. As it is only a *plan*, it's possible to achieve for most LIRs that actually provide addresses to customers.

Well not if we're sticking to the letter of the policy, and especially as in perticular *our* customers will require multi-homing, therefore a /32 to themselves... (this is a YMMV comment, but asbestos underwear donned anyway).

OTOH, there's an ongoing policy change proposal to drop the 200-customer rule. Please read up the specifics of the proposal in the archive, and voice your opinion...

I disagree with the policy change, I think that the policy change should be on allowed prefixed into the backbone. First a little background, recently in the London Webhosting world, a big drive has occured to become multi-homed and isolated from any one providers screwups, downtime, incompetence, etc. The problem with this is that very few of them have any of the necessary skills to liase with the NCC to do requests or even understand why its necessary [tangent: the number of times I see "because ARIN gave us a /24 per box" as a justification from the same group is silly]. I firmly believe in leaving the important things to those who know what they are doing, present company (I hope ;)). The small providers can have either IPv6 PI (currently disallowed and frowned upon) or become a LIR and wreak havoc on the hostmasters. I'm against dishing out /32s to Joe Blogs because I believe the subnet recommendation/guidelines as published are a good balance. In theory a /48 for any customer site should be several orders of magnitude to many for most customers in two years. But the ongoing problem is that of what should be allowed into the public v6 Internet. As much as I would like to attend RIPE 50 I have other commitments as well as government to select half-way through so I am unable to. Could we continue the discussion here or is this very much an in person topic? -- Best regards, Cameron Gray Director, Netegral Limited www.netegral.co.uk | cgray@netegral.co.uk 0871 277 NTGL (6845)