Hiya all, I disagree with this: "There was consensus to assign a /64 to an isolated Exchange Point. It was further suggested to assign the agreed standard assignment size to a site (currently a /48) to a group of inter-connected Exchange Points." This makes no sense to me. They are only going to come back and say they need another network (test equipment, multicast, etc...), and then we have to start carrying two/three/four... prefixes. Even after 80 bits of the 128 bit address range have been wasted, I repeat that IPv6 addresses are NOT IN SHORT SUPPLY and that Agregation and Prefix conservation (with registration and documentation) should be our sole concern except in completely crazy cases. Or does someone think there may really be around 1,000,000,000,000,000 entities pretending to be internet exchanges ? ---- Seperate response: David R Huberman wrote: ->Exchange points need the ability to petition RIRs directly for address ->space not for routability, but to ensure uniqueness. I think exchange point infrastructure - web servers,monitoring,test traffic boxes, etc. need to be multihomed as well as globally unique. Cheers Dave Pratt