[address-policy-wg] IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)"

Dear Laura,
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 10:36:40 +0200, Laura Cobley wrote:
[...]
Below are my views:

>Below is an excerpt from the IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment
>Policy:
First some gerneral comment:
IPv6 is *currently* primarily an experimental feature and
- from business man's view: a cost factor -.

If IPv6 should ever get some significant growth, please
*make it as easy as possible* to implement it.
Please *avoid unnecessary buerocracy*.

> 1. According to this criterion, LIRs who are operators planning to only
>    make /64 assignments appear not to qualify. Was this the community's
>    intention?
It is very unlikely that some LIR would *only* make /64 assignments
(DSL ?), but:

This criterion would be just another item to prevent IPv6 to become
a significant factor in the Internet.
Thus try to avoid it.

>    Which interpretation was intended regarding the number of
>    assignments?
In my view it was the fear that small blocks would increase the
IPv6 global routing table size.

But again, please keep in mind:
- The LIR min. alloc. was changed from /20 to /21 and
the requirement of a min. usage was dropped to permit
large organizations with redundant upstreams to become
(paying ;-) RIPE NCC members instead of using PI.
These organisations want to be independend from single
ISP's.

If you would now force them back to single ISP upstream
with a min. number of assignments, you would either
gain "plans" which are not worth the paper they are written
on, or, they just won't use IPv6.

- With today's router technology and decreased RAM pricing
and increased bandwith between BGP speakers, the larger
table should not be a big issue in the IPv6 area.
The real implementation of IPv6 (not just small experimental
traffic) will sooner or later require new routers with e.g.
improved hardware forwarding.

- Operating a LIR requires some continuous investment.
The RIPE NCC membership costs are some barrier to prevent
a polution of the IPv6 global routing table with no-traffic
prefixes.

Best Regards
Oliver Bartels



Oliver Bartels F+E + Bartels System GmbH + 85435 Erding, Germany
oliver at bartels.de + http://www.bartels.de + Tel. +49-8122-9729-0