Gert,
Gert Doering wrote: I'm strictly against IPv6 PI.
The problem in saying this is that you do not have a replacement solution. The reason we never got rid of the v4 swamp crap is because we do not have to offer people that have a prefix in the swamp any alternative that makes business sense. I hear a swamp /24 sells for $10,000. When IPv6 becomes a real business, becoming a LIR will just be "cost of doing business".
IPv4 PI nowadays is far too cheap, at least in RIPE land
I know lots of people in RIPE land that says it's far too pricey.
I do not say that there won't be anyone doing this - but I am fairly sure it *will* reduce the number of "pseudo-PI-for-multihoming" prefixes we'll see.
I do not agree. I have been known to get stuff from RIRs that I am not supposed to have, and becoming a LIR is no different. You just have to fill the paperwork the way it is supposed to. I am not saying that cheating (to become a LIR when all you need is to be multihomed) is good, but thinking that RIRs can enforce a no-cheat policy is worse.
/48s from LIR-/32s being visible in "the table". At least "regionally", like "two AS hops away from the originating AS", or something like this.
This is not enough for most multihomers. Actually, it might be considered worse than being singlehomed: It gives the primary LIR even more leverage. It seems to me that you might not have realized something fundamental about IPv6: it is never going to fly if it does not offer _better_ than IPv4 does; just being even would be having some form of address independent from the provider, and you still have to come up with a good reason to go through the migration headache. Michel.