Re: IPv6 assignments to DNS root servers in the RIPE region

[Arien Vijn <]

On 24-04-2002 16:00PM, "Xavier Henner" henner@localhost wrote:

>> create an administrative hierarchy based on /48 aggregates but I fully
>> realise that his is going out on a limb. I think however, that if we
>> were to use 'n' TLAs for nameservers, that I would prefer to see 'n'
>> /48s in my routing table than 'n' /35s, this of course from the
>> conservation point of view.
>> 
>> The same holds for Internet Exchanges. Perhaps for other sites as well.
>> How do we plan to have AMS-IX reachable from networks that do not peer
>> with AS1200, if the AMS-IX is assigned only a /48 ? I see two
>> possibilities (obvious ones, that is).
>> 1. Allocate /35 to AMS-IX and let it announce that from AS1200
>> 2. Make global policy to have 2001:7f8::/32 prefixlen 48 and lower
>> allowable.
> 3. http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/mem-services/registration/ipv6/eix-interim.html
> 
> Or is this document deprecated ?
> 

The problem is point 5.

> IX can have non globally routable adress space.
> The NOC of an IX can have a /48 from any ISP, like any other organization.

As neutral IX we can not do this. This might not be as obvious since there
are non-neutral IXes which are owned by one particular company.

AMS-IX is not owned by one party. We are an association of all parties
connecting to it. It is not desirable to have a customer relationship with
one particular member. Because every member is equal. This is the basis of
our existents.

Although it might be not as obvious as root DNS servers it is at a smaller
scale exactly the same issue. Some things can not be "owned".

> I don't see the problem here.

Hope this explained the problem. If not please say so and I'll try to find
better words. 

Kind regards, Arien

-- 

Arien Vijn                                          tel: +31 205 141 718
Amsterdam Internet Exchange                      mobile: +31 651 836 444
http://www.ams-ix.net                      e-mail: arien.vijn@localhost