stla registry db issue

[Brian E Carpenter]

Kazu, that is exactly what I am saying. It is a serious error to split a subTLA for
subISPs. One ISP must get one subTLA. Never split a subTLA between ISPs.
(The same applies to exchange points.)

If you split subTLAs between ISPs, you create the IPv6 toxic waste dump.

   Brian

"Kazu Yamamoto (山本和彦)" wrote:
> 
> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com>
> Subject: Re: stla registry db issue
> 
> > LIRs should **definitely** not split /35s among multiple ISPs. One
> > /35 is for one ISP, with the whole /29 reserved for later expansion.
> 
> In kenken's example,
>         RIR is APNIC,
>         LIR is WIDE Project,
> and
>         NLA1 is a child ISP under WIDE Project.
> 
> APNIC is certainly assigned /35 to one ISP, WIDE Project. It is up to
> WIDE Project how to use its /35 address block. Actually, when an ISP
> reguests sTLA, the ISP is required to explain how to use its sTLA
> (e.g.  5(NLA1) + 13(NLA2) in the case of WIDE Project).
> 
> Or is there any consensus not to split sTLA for child ISPs?
> 
> --Kazu

-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brian E Carpenter (IAB Chair)
Program Director, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM 
On assignment for IBM at http://www.iCAIR.org 
Attend INET 2000: http://www.isoc.org/inet2000
Non-IBM email: brian@icair.org
Ethernet address: 00-00-AC-CF-5B-82