On Wed, 5 Mar 2003, Randy Bush wrote:
Let me put it this way, what services do the IXP operators run outside the mesh that absolutely requires IPv6 space and is considered "critical", from the perspective of requiring globally routable space? TLD DNS hosting comes to mind.
and why, if an ixp chooses to do this, is it any different than if anyone else does? you want to do it, you get address space from your up-stream or justify it to an rir just as any other lir does.
randy
Hello all, Imho, tld management could perfectly have the same treatment IXPs do. Perhaps the IXP communnity is a bit more v6-aware and was a lot more active at the policy discussion sessions/mailing lists. :-) Being upstream-independent should favour TLDs management's "neutrality", the same way it also favours IXPs management's "neutrality", in terms of addressing. Personnally i wouldnt be against seeing "Global IPv6 internet exchange points assignments" turning into: "Global IPv6 internet critical infrastructure assignments". On the other hand, a third category of assignments (for TLDs management only) could be created. In these cases, /48s assignments from RIRs seems very reasonable to me, not /32s. Regards, ./Carlos "Networking is fun!" -------------- [http://www.ip6.fccn.pt] http://www.fccn.pt <cfriacas@fccn.pt>, CMF8-RIPE, CF596-ARIN, Wide Area Network Workgroup F.C.C.N. - Fundacao para a Computacao Cientifica Nacional fax: +351 218472167