There might be one missunderstanding of my original post:
> * set aside one /16 for each RIR > * out of this /16 _only_ upto /26 split into /32 (64 for each RIR > region) can be can be handed out and announced into the global routing > table. If someone need something more than /32 they should really come > up with a very good reasons now or just ask for regular RIR space I did not suggest that each and every RIR got another special space they had to administrate in co-ordination with LISP-EIG-wg. It was more a way to make sure we get a world-wide experiment so not a few EU and US ISPs claim all the space. If you want to get space from the APNIC range you have to be a LIR at APNIC, same for all the others. Of course this open up a question on how to check this but we get ASN, LIR/MNT names ++++, it's doable. The next thing I suggested was that _one_ RIR _or_ entity took on the job of administrating ths address space. That include handing out /32 from all of the above mention ranges, but also keep track of reverse DNS etc. It was not a question of tasking all RIR, or even one RIR with this job, but ask if any of the RIR would volunteer for the job. The reason for asking a RIR is that they already have the infrastructure in place... and for those that read ALL of the text in my original post, I suggested we asked RIPE :) --- Roger J --- On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Sander Steffann <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > >> I would note in passing that >> A) There is no particular reason that EID registration / allocation needs to >> be done by the RIRs >> A') There is no reason to prohibit the RIRs from providing this function, in >> competition with others, if they are interested >> B) There is no particular indication that the RIRs are interested in running >> such a function, and I would hate to see us mandate that they help with an >> experiment unless they are interested in it. > > I think it would be appropriate to ask the Address Policy working groups of > the different RIRs. I think it's a good idea to approach the chairs of those > working groups once there is a bit more clarity on the way the addresses are > supposed to be used. > > PS: There is more to it than just handing out the addresses: reverse DNS and > RPKI might be appropriate for this address space. The RIRs do have the > infrastructure in place to support them. There are other ways to delegate > reverse DNS, and maybe we choose not to support RPKI for this address space, > but we should keep those things in mind... > > Cheers, > Sander > -- Roger Jorgensen | ROJO9-RIPE [email protected] | - IPv6 is The Key! http://www.jorgensen.no | [email protected] _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
