Hi Gert,

I understand there should be rules. And I am totally for having meaningful 
rules and those rules to be followed. It is just that from my own personal 
experience and the shared experience of people I worked with in my network 
there are sometimes complications with requesting meaningful space for small 
business with multiple sites planning for additional sites in the near year or 
two.

On your remark about /48 being pretty huge, I do agree it is huge, but 
unfortunately it is still the case that a /48 is the norm and upstreams would 
filter smaller prefixes. 

As per /32 vs /19 I also agree, /32 is more than enough for almost any needs.

What I am trying to say is that sometimes people struggle getting the space 
they need and the one they planned for in future aggregated because they have 
no immediate needs. You are right, if there is immediate need they will always 
get it. 

Best,
Krasimir


-----Original Message-----
From: Gert Doering [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2019 2:05 AM
To: Krasimir Ganchev <[email protected]>
Cc: Sander Steffann <[email protected]>; Cynthia Revström <[email protected]>; 
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] IPv6 PI justification requirements

Hi,

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 08:47:04AM +0000, Krasimir Ganchev via 
address-policy-wg wrote:
> I couldn't agree more with Cynthia, policies are too strict and require 
> justification which doesn't allow expansion over time and is just based on 
> immediate needs.
> 
> All that especially in the era of exhausted IPv4 is practically unbelievable. 
> 
> No offense of course, just the reality.

This claim is just not true.

There might be some cases where expectations and grandeur plans do not match 
reality, and in this cases it's reasonable that the NCC is strict and will not 
hand out a /19 to someone who can fulfill all their expected needs with a /32.

There are other cases where the NCC is asking lots of questions, and maybe 
there are cases where the NCC is too strict.  So we need to talk about these 
and see if it's "lack of reasonable documentation on the user side" or 
"annoying interpretation on the NCC side".

OTOH, a /48 for an end-user site or a /29 for an ISP is pretty huge (we have 
not even extended our /32 to a /29 as we assume that we will never manage to 
fill the /32) - and documented reality shows that *if* you need more, you can 
get it today.

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair, and IPv6 user from day one, where the policies were
           *much* stricter than today
--
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279

Reply via email to