[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Open Access To IPv6

bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Sat May 30 20:45:57 EDT 2009

On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 05:00:38PM -0700, Garry Dolley wrote:
> On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 09:28:19PM +0000, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> > On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 02:04:22PM -0700, Garry Dolley wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 04:15:02PM -0400, Leo Bicknell wrote:
> > > > To that end, I can't support the proposal as written.  As one
> > > > commenter asked, "what if my kids want an IPv6 network to play with
> > > > in their garage?"  Well, we should find some way to accomodate that
> > > > which doesn't require service providers worldwide to spend tens of
> > > > thousands of dollars upgrading routers to hold the routes.
> > > 
> > > Exactly.  There's really no reason I should bear the cost of
> > > carrying your route because your kids want to learn about IPv6.  I
> > > wholeheartedly want to support learning about IPv6, esp. for the next
> > > generation of network operators, but doing so in a way that taxes
> > > third party network hardware, for no reason, is not the way to do it.
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Garry Dolley
> > 
> > 
> > 	i'm sorry - this smacks of shear laziness.
> > 	trying to get ARIN to manage your routing table
> > 	is kind of like asking your mom to still do your
> > 	laundry.
> Researching every /32 to see if it is worthy of being in your
> routing table is not practical.  It is not a laziness issue.

	your telling me what is practical for me to do?
	very kind of you indeed.

	however i beg to disagree - i ensure that i have the
	specifics i know i want and then proxy aggregate most 
	everything else.  there are even a few prefixes for which
	i -never- want to see traffic from and I block them.

	i'd posit that most folks do something very similar.

> > 	no one is -forcing- you to accept any route whatsoever.
> > 	your router, your choice.
> Yes, but practically speaking, I can accept all /32's or none of
> them, with a little wiggle room with filters.  

	i can't tell you what is practical for you.

> I can set up filters, sure, but anyone running a multi-homed network
> with real customers, peers, and traffic knows that maintaining
> filters that actually work well is almost a lesson in futility.  

	routing has not been "fire and forget" for many years.
	if you don't pay attention, your going to get burned.

> > 	do the thought experiment... how many /32s are there in
> > 	the IPv6 universe?  Got a router for that?  Didn't think so.
> > 
> > 	Folk are going to have to face the fact that they can't
> > 	depend on their benevolent RIR to manage the potential size
> > 	of the routing table anymore...  
> But what we can do is try to promote policy that doesn't give out
> prefixes like they are going out of style.  Every /32 prefix
> assigned and announced takes up one more RIB slot for me and every
> other ISP on the planet.  So, I'm going to do what I can to save
> that resource.

	borrowing your metaphor, I'd like to see one family of
	prefixes come into style... and if that means treating them
	like loss-leaders for a bit, then I guess that is what needs
	to happen.  Then, we can start worrying about them going 
	out of style.

	I'll reiterate again.  Just becauase I get a /32 and announce
	it to my peers, is zero reason for you to hold it (at all,
	or for any length of time, or in perpetutity).   Folks
	really need to wean themsleves of the dependency on an RIR
	to craft their routing policies.  


> -- 
> Garry Dolley
> ARP Networks, Inc. | http://www.arpnetworks.com | (818) 206-0181
> Data center, VPS, and IP Transit solutions
> Member Los Angeles County REACT, Unit 336 | WQGK336
> Blog http://scie.nti.st

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list