Re: [ipv6-wg] Re: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Andre's guide to fixIPv6

["Cameron C. Gray" <]

Per Heldal wrote:
> Shim6 is work in progress and may be used as an argument to adjust 
> adress-assignment policies sometime in the future. If we want ipv6
> deployed today we have to provide a mechanism to support requirements
> about redundancy and independence from individual providers.

I think this hit the nail on the head.  Providers (especially those
non-LIR) will not accept something along the lines of SHIM6 or A.N.Other
competing idea until it gives them just that -- INBOUND ROUTING
INDEPENDENCE.

The only way these people see achieving this is if they can announce
their prefix (of whatever size or status) to each of their providers and
have it form part of everybody's tables.

Personally I don't have a view either way as whether it should be PI or
Special Assignments or Become-A-LIR to achieve it, although everyones
fees will drop with more LIRs (read: members).

My view is relatively simple; either give everyone who wants one and has
an AS-Number a /32 or allow /48s into the backbone table.  This is of
course if we actually want to give up using IPv4; without the above most
providers will see it as a step backward and a bad thing (tm).

I am fast gathering this is an unpopular position so I'll get the
asbestos underwear ready, but in the smaller circles (read: Tier 3 and
below) this is an absolute requirement.

-- 
Best Regards,

Cameron Gray
Director, Netegral Limited
www.netegral.co.uk | 0871 277 6845