Let's pretend that the HAL computer company decides it needs a /40 to
cover its internal needs for the next 100 years. What kind of policy
would be needed to allow that?
Brian
leo vegoda wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 03:05:18PM +0300, Pekka Savola wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > Nothing prevents you from *not* routing those addresses on the
> > Internet? Unless of course it's a problem in the global-v6 policy, which
> > should then be reviewed.
>
> The current policy says that to "qualify for an initial allocation
> of IPv6 address space, an organisation must [...] plan to provide
> IPv6 connectivity to organisations to which it will assign /48s
> by advertising that connectivity through its single aggregated
> address allocation".
>
> The implication is that an LIR must plan to announce its allocation
> to the public Internet.
>
> However, the wording is vague and leads to uncertainty for those
> requesting space and those evaluating requests. I would like to
> see the policy updated to use crisp, clear, unambiguous language.
> If there is a consensus that unique, public addresses should not be
> available to private networks that will not connect to the Internet
> then that should be stated clearly. If that is not the case then
> the reverse should be made clear.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> leo vegoda
> RIPE NCC
> Registration Services Manager
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brian E Carpenter
Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM
NEW ADDRESS <brc@zurich.ibm.com> PLEASE UPDATE ADDRESS BOOK
_______________________________________________
global-v6 mailing list
global-v6@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6