Hi, On Wed, May 29, 2002 at 09:29:33AM +0000, James Aldridge wrote:
For IPv6, on the other hand, a supernational registry can only get a single allocation, irrespective of its size and contributions to the NCC. I don't recall this policy change being discussed in the RIPE policy making forum (the LIR WG) being being put in place by the NCC for the then interim IPv6 policy.
I am aware that there are few supernational registries and that they are a pain for the RIPE NCC but this policyy change seems to work against the aggregation principles we need to follow if we're not going to have the routing table growth rate we've seen with IPv4.
I don't understand why "not giving out multiple IPv6 blocks" is "against the aggregation principles". Could you elaborate on this? Being a bit more relaxed in judging whether a multinational LIR really needs a "/22" (to be a bit extreme) would mimic the "IPv4 approach" (give out more space than usual) fairly well. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 45201 (45114) SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-299