[ppml] 2006-7 IPV6 Initial Allocation suggested changes- Input Requested
Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com
Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com
Tue Nov 14 05:41:12 EST 2006
- Previous message: [ppml] 2006-7 IPV6 Initial Allocation suggested changes- InputRequested
- Next message: [ppml] 2006-7 IPV6 Initial Allocation suggested changes-Input Requested
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> d. be an existing, known ISP in the ARIN region OR be an organization which > can justify intent to announce the requested IPv6 address space within one > year. This is the best of the lot. No need for an ASN since ISP startups have never needed an ASN to get IPv4 allocations. No need for language about contracts and documents since this already is part of the IPv4 inital allocation process. But, I also think that it is unneccessary to mention announcements since ISP startups have not had that requirement with IPv4. Not all network architectures require address ranges to be announced in BGP4 and not all BGP4 announcements are visible to the so-called public Internet. To put it simply, if an organization can show some justification that they are operating or about to operate an IPv6 network which supplies connectivity services to the networks (IPv6 or not) of other organizations, then this should be enough to give them an IPv6 ISP allocation. The whole reason for the distinction between allocation and assignment in IPv4 was that ISP networks connect other networks and therefore are constantly growing at a rate faster than end-user networks. We have to be careful that we are not just tinkering with language here or we will create more problems. The meaning and intent behind the language are what is important. --Michael Dillon
- Previous message: [ppml] 2006-7 IPV6 Initial Allocation suggested changes- InputRequested
- Next message: [ppml] 2006-7 IPV6 Initial Allocation suggested changes-Input Requested
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list