[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Who provides v6 uplink via tunnel ?
Jeroen Massar jeroen at unfix.org
Sun May 22 15:05:39 CEST 2005
On Sun, 2005-05-22 at 13:16 +0200, Gert Doering wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 12:01:58PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote: > > if you are a not at an IX yet I would really > > start to question the IPv6 address request procedures... > > I can't follow you here. The IPv6 allocation policies are not tied to > technical infrastructure requirements, and that's a good thing - we *want* > smaller ISPs to be able to get an IPv6 allocation, even if they can't > reasonably warrant to connect to a major IX. Especially as upstream > prices tend to be cheaper these days than just the access link to an IX, > unless you happen to sit in the same city... Usually, afaik, ISP's are already at an IX and also have their upstreams there and are mostly operating from a colo close to that IX, thus being at an IX also directly makes one have multiple upstreams and thus at least one of them having IPv6 connectivity available. Greets, Jeroen -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 240 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ipv6-wg/attachments/20050522/6df5d16e/attachment.sig>
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]