| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
You're here: Home |
Hi, Roger Jorgensen schrieb: [...]
At the point a user want PI without being able to justify getting their own address space based on the usage, they shouldn´t get it.As said before, only organization big enough to justify their own netblock should get it. No PI or PA, just a netblock.
this is absurd. If one needs provider independence and can't be satisfied with any other option out there like NAT, round-robin DNS, shim6 or whatever else is there, anyone should be able to get a Prefix which isn't filtered in the DFZ. This "size" argument is really racist and noone should come up again with that anymore nowerdays. It's bad. And more imporant: there is absolutely no standing argument which supports this.
Fortunately, reality overcame this very lame 42th-or-so iteration of PI-yes-or-no discussion and there is [IPv4|IPv6]-PI almost in all RIR regions and hopefully soon in all regions.
We rather should focus on more important issues, like bringing up more alternative solutions (someone finally get shim6 to work? :-) ) to provide to potentional "PI"-canidates, which might prevent them from "needing" their Prefix in the global table. Or how to prevent ASs all over the world deaggregate their netblocks for reasons like traffic engineering and other selfmade excuses.
I'm happy to talk any customer out of this "i need an ASN and PI space" attitude if there are alternatives or if their only argument is "i don't want to renumber again!", or there is a chance that they just become LIR or similiar. But who are we to tell anyone "you are not worthy to get your prefix in the DFZ! Live with it!"?
-- ======================================================================== = Sascha Lenz SLZ-RIPE slz@baycix.de = = Network Operations = = BayCIX GmbH, Landshut * PGP public Key on demand * = ========================================================================
