Re: [address-policy-wg] 2005-08 New Policy Proposal

[Gert Doering <]

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 01:11:03PM +0200, Jørgen Hovland wrote:
> Gert, I think you are missing my point.
> Our products may issue max N addresses per link from dhcp defined by the 
> product specifications.
> Can I allocate 10 IPv6 addresses to a customer from our own pool, or does 
> the customer need its own record in the DB ? If so, _must_ this allocation 
> be a /64 even though the customer will only use 10 addresses?
> 
> [ ] Yes.
> [ ] No.
> [ ] Don't know.

The IPv6 end user assignment policies are pretty strict in that regard.

There is no option to give "10 addresses" to a user - period.  When becoming
LIR, you've signed that you'll follow the RIPE policies - and this is 
established RIPE policy.

So the whole question is moot.

[..]
> >Security has *nothing* to do with the number of IPv6 addresses -
> >"security against *what*?".
> 
> Security has to do with everything. Never think otherwise.

So please explain how giving users less IP addresses brings security
benefits (user tracking comes to mind, but that can be done just fine
by /64).

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  81421

SpaceNet AG                    Mail: netmaster@localhost
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14      Tel : +49-89-32356-0
D- 80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-234