[address-policy-wg] Policy Proposal 2006-02 (IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy)

> The "must be advertised" part causes any non-internet usage to be 'illegal'.

I disagree.  The text states "This prefix must be advertised within one 
year of the allocation being made".  It doesn't state where the 
announcement should be made.  If the prefix is announced on a private 
network, then the LIR has satisfied their obligation to this clause.

> As the number of assignments is removed, there is no way to check up on
> this, next to there not being any requirement of actually registering
> these assignments in the RIPE db, thus there is no way to check.

The alternative at the moment is that people lie about their requirements - 
  as they do, regularly.

The bottom line here is that unlike ipv4, there is no practical scarcity of 
ipv6 address space.  The statement that you refer to means in practice: "as 
a LIR, you are entitled to an ipv6 address block, so long as you tell us 
that you have plans to do something, at some stage".  Is this a bad thing? 
  Are you really saying that RIPE should create barriers to allocating ipv6 
space to LIRs?  If you want barriers, could you please explain why?  Why 
shouldn't a bona-fide LIR be allocated a first ipv6 /32 as a matter of 
course?  What are they becoming LIRs for, if not to sub-assign address space?

As an interim solution, I'm in favour of this proposal as it stands and 
believe that it should go though.  We've wrangled about it long enough, 
without making a large amount of headway.  Meanwhile, LIRs are being forced 
to lie to get ipv6 space, which IMHO is plain stupid.

However, I would like to see a proposal in the future to remove the 
requirement prohibiting de-aggregation. Firstly, routing table announcement 
policies are not RIPE's business.  Secondly, de-aggregation and ipv6 table 
size will simply not be as much of a problem in ipv6 as ipv4, because a) 
there is no supply constraint and therefore no reason to split larger 
blocks, b) we've come a long way since ipv4 assignment started and now have 
good policies in place which will strongly encourage aggregation and c) 
most larger operators are - by policy - going to filter on RIR allocation 
boundaries for PA ipv6 space anyway, which means that in practice 
de-aggregation is not going to be very useful.

Nick
-- 
Network Ability Ltd. | Head of Operations      | Tel: +353 1 6169698
3 Westland Square    | INEX - Internet Neutral | Fax: +353 1 6041981
Dublin 2, Ireland    | Exchange Association    | Email: nick at inex.ie