Re: Interim Policy proposal for IPv6 Address Assignment Policyfor Internet Exchange Points, ipv6-wg@localhost, mir@localhost, nurani@localhost

[Fearghas McKay <]

Hi Dave

At 3:30 pm +0200 31/8/01, Dave Pratt wrote:
> Hiya all,
>
> Unfortunately, I must respond against the proposal as it stands with use of a
> /64 allocation.
>
> Allocations of /64 for the peering LAN can be obtained already from a separate
> block (I forget the details - but I think from a US based ISP only block
> managed by David Huberman). I fail to see therefore what this proposal helps
> with.
>
> This does not solve the problem as I see it, which is how to reliably, and
> independently of a particular ISP, multihome the infrastructure associated
> with the exchange point. From which range do the addresses for www.IXP.net or
> lg.IXP.net or term-serv.IXP.net come from ?
>
> For this I propose globaly routable allocations be made, with a size of at
> least /48. The IXP can then decide whether to use part of that for the
> exchange LAN, or whether to get a separate /64.
The initial allocations will be made with a boundary of /48 to allow 
for a change to be made if the consensus in Prague is for /48 rather 
than /64.

The address allocation is for infrastructure - so it is likely to 
filtered, and it will all come from a /35 to ease filter writing.

For external facing services the address allocation comes from 
members/customers rather than this allocation.

	f