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 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Florian Weimer
fweimer at bfk.de
Wed Feb 16 11:30:43 CET 2011
* Sander Steffann: > If the people in the working group feel that routing table size is > not as important anymore as it was a few years ago it might be > possible to relax the policy about IPv6 PI space. As one data point, it is a total non-issue for the technology we use. We probably can't process an IPv6 routing table which carries as much information as the IPv4 routing table today, but we are ready to adopt. (We're certainly not representative, but you've got to start somewhere.) > It doesn't solve the problem that access providers that run on IPv4 > PI space can't run on IPv6 PI space. These seem to be two separate > issues. Not really. If LIRs could hand out independently routable /48 chunks of their PA space, then those folks wouldn't need PI space at all. -- Florian Weimer <fweimer at bfk.de> BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/ Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1 D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI resource question - Not for ISP but hosting
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]