Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg] IPv6 micro allocation or something else?

[Gert Doering <]

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 12:19:03PM +0100, Elmar K. Bins wrote:
> Just to get the thing rolling again with something new :-)

Which is not so new.  Pekka wrote a draft about that, some years ago.

> gert@localhost (Gert Doering) wrote:
> 
> > Personally, I've seen some doomsayers so far ("IPv6 will die if we have
> > no PI!"), but I can't remember having seen a proposal for rules that let
> > "those that we all agree should have it" have PI, and "those that we
> > all agree should not have it" not have it.
> 
> How about: Every ASN is entitled to an IPv6 block. Full stop.
> Then you can tie it to independency of routing and to the rules for ASNs.
> 
> Anyone else think along these lines?

This will change the question "who is worthy to receive an IPv6 block" into 
"who is worthy to receive an AS number" - which is today defined on a pure
technical basis, with the "hurdle" being the address acquisition, not the
AS number.

If you tie it to the *routing* policy thing ("verifiable dual upstreams"
or such), it will indeed solve some parts of "the PI problem", without 
opening the flood gates to "everyone".  OTOHO, it might make "everyone" 
want to get an AS number - and BGP "multihoming" isn't so hard to achieve,
if it only serves the purpose of qualifying for an AS number...

Now if the future would not be so cloudy today...

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