[ppml] Policy Proposal 2005-1: Provider-independent IPv6
Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com
Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com
Tue May 2 04:49:35 EDT 2006
- Previous message: [ppml] Address Space versus Routing Slots
- Next message: [ppml] [GLOBAL-V6] Re: [address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it less destructive
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> Most customer facing routers don't have to have full tables, and, for the > ones that do, there are several alternatives to the idea of a full routing > table for both protocols on one router. Hear, hear! Network architects, engineers and operators do have alternatives. It is likely that some of these people have made bad choices and therefore ARIN's PI policy for IPv6 will cause them some pain, but this is not a good reason to reject the policy. The operations situation is not cut and dried; there are many possible ways that operators can adapt to PI addresses. Sometimes the only way to get people to put their thinking caps on is to present them with a fait accompli. But, if it turns out that ARIN's new IPv6 PI policy is shortsighted and operators can show that insurmountable problems are imminent and none of the technical alternatives will mitigate their problems, then the policy can be changed again. This is a PROCESS, this is not about carving monuments in stone. --Michael Dillon
- Previous message: [ppml] Address Space versus Routing Slots
- Next message: [ppml] [GLOBAL-V6] Re: [address-policy-wg] Just say *NO* to PI space -- or how to make it less destructive
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list