Re: IAB/IESG Recommendations on IPv6 Address Delegation

Fred, I would like to add a few comments and a proposal to your marvellous summary. (Even if it is very difficult to say anything at this stage). Comments: 1, The IPv6 address scheme might be valid for two centuries or even longer, and not only for 50 years. 2, The proposed "sparce allocation for subsribers (sites)", "dence allocation for providers (networks)" should work very well for customers, however, not necessarly for providers. You mentioned already the multihoming issues. There is an other open issue: how to scale effectively the routing. Proposal: I suggest adding a clause to your summary: ADDRESS ALLOCATION POLICY will be reviewed every five years. If different address allocation policy will be set up for any reason, then all subscribers and providers having already address space should adopt themselves to the new policy within TEN years, the latest. If they do not adopt, their not properly allocated address space will be blocked from the global routing. Many thanks for your time, best regards, Geza Turchanyi

At 10:27 AM 9/12/00 +0200, Turchanyi Geza wrote:
ADDRESS ALLOCATION POLICY will be reviewed every five years. If different address allocation policy will be set up for any reason, then all subscribers and providers having already address space should adopt themselves to the new policy within TEN years, the latest. If they do not adopt, their not properly allocated address space will be blocked from the global routing.
that's probably not unreasonable. However, that's not mine to say, I don't think. IETF advises the RIRs, and from them the operators and subscribers, on how to pass out the addresses. After that, actual use is in the RIRs' and operators' hands.
participants (2)
-
Fred Baker
-
Turchanyi Geza