IPv6 Routing table will be bloated?

Tue Oct 26 19:40:54 UTC 2010

HAHA that would totally make the MAFIAA's day...
entering all your dialup and adsl customers into whois as they would be 
"end users" :P quite sure the EU would not agree on that definition of 
what constitutes an end-user, and therefore, its quite possible to provide 
access services on PI space (as you don't make sub delegations anyway)

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote:

> 2.      RIPE has always issued PI space to LIRs (ISPs are by
>        definition LIRs).
>
> ISPs are not per-se LIRs.
>
> LIRs register IP space on behalf of customers
>
> customers that do not make delegations themselves (i'm quite sure you don't 
> put each and every one of your access customers into whois, for one thing 
> because that would violate privacy laws :P do not need to be a LIR, and can 
> just do so on PI space.
>
> Shared hosting ISPs also do not make subdelegations and generally don't even 
> uses the ips on a one-specific-customer-per-ip basis.
>
> So no, ISP's do not have to be a LIR, and LIRs do not have to be an ISP.
> (in fact, we are considering moving our LIR activities to a completely 
> seperate legal entity from our internet activities).
>
> as a LIR is just a buro that issues IP space and does not nessesarily own or 
> operate a network.
>
> -- 
> Greetings,
>
> Sven Olaf Kamphuis,
> CB3ROB Ltd. & Co. KG
> =========================================================================
> Address: Koloniestrasse 34         VAT Tax ID:      DE267268209
>         D-13359                   Registration:    HRA 42834 B
>         BERLIN                    Phone:           +31/(0)87-8747479
>         Germany                   GSM:             +49/(0)152-26410799
> RIPE:    CBSK1-RIPE                e-Mail:          sven at cb3rob.net
> =========================================================================
> <penpen> C3P0, der elektrische Westerwelle
>
> =========================================================================
>
> Confidential: Please be advised that the information contained in this
> email message, including all attached documents or files, is privileged
> and confidential and is intended only for the use of the individual or
> individuals addressed. Any other use, dissemination, distribution or
> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
>
>
> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
>> 
>> On Oct 26, 2010, at 11:19 AM, Sven Olaf Kamphuis wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>>> 
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> On 10/26/2010 12:04 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>>>>>> In practice, the RIRs are implementing sparse allocation which makes
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> possible to aggregate subsequent allocations. I.e. not as bad as it
>>>>>> may
>>>>>> seem.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Except, if you are given bare minimums, and you are assigning out to
>>>>> subtending ISPs bare minimums, those subtending ISPs will end up with
>>>>> multiple networks. Some of them are BGP speakers. I can't use sparse
>>>>> allocation because I was given minimum space and not the HD-Ratio
>>>>> threshold space.
>>>> 
>>>> Wait... If you are issuing space to ISPs that are multihomed, they should 
>>>> be getting their own addresses. Even if they aren't multihomed, they 
>>>> should probably be getting their own addresses. Why would you be 
>>>> supplying them with address space if they are an ISP?
>>>> 
>>>> -Randy
>>> 
>>> to my knowledge, RIPE still does not issue ipv6 PI space.
>>> so giving them their own space, is "problematic" to say the least.
>>> 
>> RIPE issues PI space in a couple of different forms...
>> 
>> 1.	Sponsoring LIR can pay 50 Euros/year and subsequently
>> 	bill the recipient whatever they choose for the PI space.
>> 
>> 2.	RIPE has always issued PI space to LIRs (ISPs are by
>> 	definition LIRs).
>> 
>> 3.	This is NANOG. NA != EU.
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
>> 
>