Roger,
Perhaps I am being naive, but why not just give the space to IANA and
then they assign to RIRs?
Regards,
as
On 12/01/2013 20:17, Roger Jørgensen wrote:
> 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
>>
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
