[address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Stolpe
stolpe at resilans.se
Tue Oct 29 16:00:56 CET 2013
As one of the authors of this proposal, maybe I should just shut up now, but I would just like to say that the current version of the proposal is a first attempt trying to solve an identified problem. Apparently it became a bit too complex. Another comment below. On Fri, 25 Oct 2013, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote: > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 8:03 PM, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote: > Dear Address Policy WG, > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 04:36:24PM +0200, Marco Schmidt wrote: > > A proposed change to RIPE Documents ripe-589, "IPv6 Address > > Allocation and Assignment Policy", ripe-451, "IPv6 Address > > Space Policy For Internet Exchange Points" and ripe-233, > > "IPv6 Addresses for Internet Root Servers In The RIPE Region" > > is now available for discussion. > [..] > > We encourage you to review this proposal and send your comments to > > <address-policy-wg at ripe.net> before 25 October 2013. > > The discussion phase for this proposal is now over, but after the > feedback received at the RIPE meeting in Athens (and here on the list, > even if in the wrong thread :) ) the chairs have deviced to take a step > back, and re-state the fundamental "do we want to go there?" question > (and extend the discussion phase by +4 weeks). > > The proposal aims to unify IPv6 PA and IPv6 PI space into one kind of > address space, "IPv6 addresses". This is the goal. > > The idea to go there came from various people in the community, mostly > for one reason - having two differently "coloured" addresses that do > the same thing, routingwise, but follow different policies and have > different strings attached, creates quite some confusion for the folks > out there that can no longer be nicely separated into "ISPs" (->become > RIPE members, use PA) and "end-users" (->use PI, if BGP-based multihoming > and/or upstream independence is required). > > > In my opinion, this distinction is not particularly useful in itself, > and could very well be a floating definition. > > Coming from the DNS registrar side, I cannot help thinking that looking > at the registry/registrar model might be beneficial for making things > clearer for people out there. > > One way of seeing this, is that the LIRs are "registrars" for IP address > space, and that their role could simply be about registering and > brokering assignments and allocations for the RIR. > > An ISP or an "end user" then becomes an unnecessary distinction, as they > would both have to go to a LIR to get their address space, and it's just > a matter of placing a request for the correct size, at the discretion of > the applicant and the LIR. > > Mind you, I think this is mostly about perspective, but if we could use > the similarities with DNS registrations, then end customers (ISPs or > whatever) might have less confusion. > > I could very well be wrong. I (personally) think you are right. You don't have so set up a domain name registrar if you just want to use a couple of domain names. We regularly see entities out there who just want some address space. Sometimes just a small space and sometimes a very space. I think if would be beneficial if they had an option to ask a registrar (LIR) to do the book keeping for them. Best Regards, Daniel Stolpe _________________________________________________________________________________ Daniel Stolpe Tel: 08 - 688 11 81 stolpe at resilans.se Resilans AB Fax: 08 - 55 00 21 63 http://www.resilans.se/ Box 13 054 556741-1193 103 02 Stockholm
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2013-06 New Policy Proposal (PA/PI Unification IPv6 Address Space)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]