[address-policy-wg] Status of 2011-02 Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)?
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Status of 2011-02 Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Status of 2011-02 Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Job Snijders
job at instituut.net
Mon Aug 8 10:06:53 CEST 2011
Dear All, I agree with removing the multi-homing requirement for IPv6 PI. Its pretty awkward to send your customers to a competitor because to deploy IPv6 PI space he or she needs to be multi-homed. Also, rising technologies such as LISP allow end-users to be multi-homed in a way that is transparent to the DFZ, so why bother restricting people to BGP multi-homing. Kind regards, Job Snijders On 6 aug. 2011, at 12:42, Erik Bais wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > A quick update on the status of 2011-02 policy. > > I spoke with the AP-WG-chair last week and the decision is that there will > be an extended review period to give people the time to ask questions if > needed on the proposal. > > So to everyone on the list, let's hear it. > > I've done a presentation on RIPE62 on the proposal for those not familiar > with 2011-02 and you can find the PPT here : > http://ripe62.ripe.net/presentations/171-2011-02_ripe62.ppt > > You can read the policy proposal itself here: > http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2011-02 > > In short, the policy proposal is to remove the multi-homing requirement for > PI IPv6. > Currently, companies can become a LIR and get IPv6, with no multi-home > requirement, same with requesting IPv4 PI. > And companies that don't want to or (legally) can't become a LIR but do want > to have their own IPv6 addresses are required to be multi-homed. > > The only change in text in the RIPE-512 is: > > Remove the line: > > a) demonstrate that it will be multihomed > > For those that agree with the policy and everything is clear, express your > support on the AP-WG-mailing list your support. > > Kind regards, > Erik Bais > Co-author of 2011-02 >
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Status of 2011-02 Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)?
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Status of 2011-02 Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]