[address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Carlos Morgado
chbm at cprm.net
Thu Jun 17 14:46:06 CEST 2004
On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 01:21:39PM +0100, Michael.Dillon at radianz.com wrote: > IPv4 addresses they have or what plans they have for IPv6. Only one > thing matters: the organization has proven that they have a real > IP network and can justify receiving a RIPE IPv4 allocation. > This means that they are a real IP network operator. And since > all IP network operators will tranisition to IPv6 at some time > in the future, they should need no other justification for an > IPv6 allocation. > Here here. This process should be much more streamlined than the person doing the IPv6 initiall allocation request saying "we have n networks, covering m addresses, we plan to dual stack everything in the future so we need x IPv6 space". There should be a simple rule saying for x IPv4 space you get y IPv6 space, if you need more you'd need to justify it. > The same rule should apply in all the other 4 RIR regions. > > The pseudo-logic behind this rule is that IPv4 addresses are > scarce therefore we have to be careful how many we allocate > and who we give them to. Since IPv6 is like IPv4 we also need > complex rules to limit who gets addresses. The flaw is that > IPv6 is not *LIKE* IPv4. It is a simpler and more flexible Even if it was *LIKE* IPv4, using the same criteria would make sense. As it's not, using IPv4 has a criteria means you're already using a stricter criteria than needed. > > This means that the risk of doing the wrong thing is vastly > smaller than it was with IPv4. We should plan to err on the side > of simplicity and flexibilty, i.e. give everyone an IPv6 allocation > if they already have an IP network. There is very little downside > to doing this. > As oposed to making needlessly hard to get an assigment on the edges of the Internet, where the commercial demand starts. cheers -- Carlos Morgado <chbm at cprm.net> - Internet Engineering - Phone +351 214146594 GPG key: 0x75E451E2 FP: B98B 222B F276 18C0 266B 599D 93A1 A3FB 75E4 51E2 The views expressed above do not bind my employer.
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]