On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 12:17:45PM +0000, Alain Patrick AINA wrote:
> > those in the AfriNIC region who want globally unique, registered space
> > but do not plan to "announce the IPv6 PI address space" have no method
> > of getting any such space. if anyone reads this differently than i do,
> > please educate me. i don't think they mean 'announce' to partner(s) or
> > within intra-AS boundaries, but admittedly i haven't read their mail
> > archives to see if this angle was ever brought up.
>
> no.
please elaborate.
> the PI policy was not developed and discussed to cover the ULA-C needs.
> The ULA-C proposal did not reach concensus in our region and the outcome of
> the IETF discussions is awaited. But nothing prevents the region for changing
> the PI policy.
and as i said:
>>> nothing prevents other RIRs from changing their policies later to have
>>> similar requirements. also, nothing indicates other RIRs are considering
>>> changing their policies in this direction now or in the future.
this is not a slam at the afrinic decision and it is in the realm of the
RIRs to make/change policy such as requiring your allocate PIv6 space
to be announced to the DFZ. i brought it up as advice to this workgroup
to understand that the "drop ULA-C, people {could,should} just use PI"
argument may or may not hold water at any given place in space and time.
the IETF has the ability here (through delegation to IANA) to make sure
that IANA/RIRs have the ability to issue ULA-C prefixes, if they desire
to.
-- bill
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
