[ppml] Re: Re: 2005-1:Multi-national Business Enablement

[Daniel Roesen]

On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:05:20PM +0200, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> > Without sensible policies, I won't be getting IPv6 at home (or at work, if
> > 2005-1 doesn't pass) at all.  It's not routing or transit in the core that
> > we're waiting on now -- it's address policies at the edge.
> 
> 2005-1 is not for the home. 2005-1 is for organizations (read:
> businesses) that have a need for multihoming, that means multiple
> separate physical upstreams and a vast userbase and LIR membership.
> Or are you going to polute BGP with /128's ?

Did you actully read 2005-1?

2005-1 refers to "end-site organizations", not businesses. I don't think
that Owen meant "businesses" when he wrote "organizations". This "only
big business shalt be independent" thinking is a disease.

Further, there is no requirement for either "separate physical
upstreams", "vast userbase" or "LIR membership" in there. Not even
implicitly derrived from ASN assignment policy, as you need none of
those to qualify for an ASN.

For recollection, here is the proposed policy text of 2005-1 again:

<cite>
6.11 Assignments to End-sites with Autonomous System Numbers

Any end-site which meets the current criteria for assignment of an
autonomous system number (ASN) shall also qualify for one IPv6 prefix
assignment of the minimum size justified under the ARIN guidelines for
assignment by an LIR. If the organization grows to require more space,
it will not be entitled to an additional block, but rather may obtain a
new, replacement block of sufficient size to meet its needs in exchange
for making the commitment to return its existing block within 24 months,
so that it may be reassigned.
</cite>


Regards,
Daniel

-- 
CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: dr at cluenet.de -- dr at IRCnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0