Hi, On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 02:15:42PM +0100, Ronald van der Pol wrote:
On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 13:56:18 +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
Alexander Gall has summarized it pretty well - if we want to give out /48s freely, then the quite conservative RIR->LIR allocation policy currently in place *hurts*. Very true if you mean that you cannot build a reasonable hierarchy.
Yup. This is mostly the point behind my rantings. Trying to build a resonable hierarchy through some levels of regional aggregation inside my network, and then aggregation through 1-2 levels of resellers. The other point is that one of the main arguments in that RFC is "if a customer changes ISPs, they will always get the same size prefix (a /48)", which is just not working if customers can very liberally get more than a /48 to account for "another-level-down end sites". So we're back to the address space haggling days, just argueing about the number of /48s instead the number of single IPs. So I still think that the concept of "one /48 for each site" without a proper definition of "site" is flawed. And yes, it's arguably pretty impossible to give a working definiton.
As for the argument "are universities ISPs"? Yes, at least over here, a fair number of them are providing IP connectivity to the student's hostels via leased line/ethernet, and to all other students via ISDN/Modem dialup. So for all address management purposes, they are ISPs.
This is true in the Netherlands too. Yes, I think those should be treated as ISPs, probably getting a prefix (>> /48) from their NRN.
See above :-) Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 55593 (55180) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299