Daniel, On Friday, 2012-11-23 00:36:46 +0100, Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg@ripe.net> wrote:
On 13.11.2012, at 11:59 , Shane Kerr wrote:
Daniel,
On Tuesday, 2012-11-13 09:36:39 +0100, Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg@ripe.net> wrote:
On 09.11.2012, at 12:05 , Wilfried Woeber wrote:
Overall, I think this is very dangerous approach, and the wrong way to start with.
There might be very good reasons, why a full block of (IPv6) addresses, or a subset of, ist not (yet) globally visible. Announcing/Hijacking those addresses may seriously interfere with local tests or pilot deployment.
IMHO this should be strictly opt-in, instead of opt-out!
Wilfried.
Wilfried, you are right. The agreement I thought we made with Merit was to use unallocated address space. Apparently a misunderstanding occurred somewhere along the way. We will talk to Merit and correct this.
Possibly such experiments should be announced in advance in the future, so that everyone can know what is going on. Ideally a pointer to a web page with full details about the experiment, but at least just a quick mail to the routing working group (and the IPv6 working group in cases where appropriate) seems reasonable.
If this is something that requires a policy change I'd be happy to push it forward.
Cheers,
https://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/ipv6-darknet-experiment
Thanks for this link, however in this case this is not a complete answer. I was obviously unclear, so let me try again. 1. This link was not posted *in advance*. The reason I proposed in advance is partially so that we could get review and feedback such as Wilfried's, and prevent future issues. 2. It was not sent to any of the RIPE mailing lists until after problems were reported. RIPE Labs is cool, but AFAIK the RIPE community still lives & breathes in the RIPE working group mailing lists. 3. There is apparently neither a procedure nor a policy concerning notification of experiments. Cheers, -- Shane