This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] IPv6 addresses to transit-providers
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 addresses to transit-providers
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 addresses to transit-providers
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jon Lawrence
jon at lawrence.org.uk
Wed Mar 2 12:29:30 CET 2005
On Wednesday 02 March 2005 10:17, Hans Petter Holen wrote: > > Whait if I am (mainly) anIPv6 transit provider with 201 customers - all > beeing LIR on their own: > - I cannot get address space from my upstream because I have none or > several depending on my size and definition of "up" > - I cant make a plan to assigh 200 /48s since all my customers are LIRs > on their own > - I am hardly an end site ? > > how do I get adresses under the current policy ? > If I cannot, how do we modify the policy to alow me to get adresses ? IMHO, this is what is wrong with the current policy. It says you should 'PLAN' to assign 200 /48s it doesnot say you 'WILL' assign. In order to obey the letter of the policy you could say that you 'PLAN' to assign each of your customers a /48 - whether they use it is entirely upto them (as they've got their own allocation they would probably never use the /48 from you). This would get you an allocation and be obeying the letter of the policy. You're not strictly lying, but it is a completely pointless use of address space. Jon
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 addresses to transit-providers
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 addresses to transit-providers
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]