Re: [6bone] RE: [ipv6-wg@localhost] Update on IPv6 filter recommendation

[Hank Nussbacher <]

On Fri, 16 May 2003, leo vegoda wrote:

> Hank Nussbacher hank@localhost writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> >What are the RIRs doing to reclaim all those "red" lines of allocations
> >that have never once appeared in a routing table?I would say all 
> >assignments from before Jan 2002 and that have "never"in the "last
> >seen" column are ripe for revocation.Question is, why hasn't this 
> >been done before and has this been discussed so far?
> 
> Is there a policy requirement that IPv6 prefixes allocated by RIRs must
> be routed on The Internet? I've not found it in the current "IPv6
> Address Allocation and Assignment Policy".

Is there such a requirement for IPv4 prefixes?  If yes (and I would hope
so, otherwise why would anyone want RFC1918 addresses when one can get
"real" IPs), then I think the same should apply for IPv6 prefixes.  

> 
> Regards,
> 
> --
> leo vegoda
> RIPE NCC
> Registration Services
> 

-Hank