Who is in charge of the 2002::/16 reverse DNS ?

[Pim van Pelt]

Jeroen,
| Ofcourse if one sizes down renumbering isn't easy...
| But if you move from one /48 to another /48 it should be a piece of
| cake. The AMS-IX did it perfectly well last weeks.
| First the routers on where in 3FFE:3000::/64 (out of the /48) now they
| have moved to 2001:07F8:1::/64 (out of the /48).
| 
| eg: 3ffe:3000::a500:8954:1 became 2001:7f8:1::a500:8954:1

The AMS-IX did not do such a great job on this. We were requested to
renumber one (1) shared medium /64. To date, still several members have
not renumberd theirs, some have. This is because we now run two prefixes
for the time being on the AMS-IX.

The renumbering aspect also takes with it the DNS aspect, and equally so
I do not see things resolving yet. The delegation of the new
2001:7f8:1::/48 prefix has to be dealt with at RIPE and the AMS-IX site.

Apart from that, you are missing the point that having a native uplink to
your ISP/IX is also "a transition mechanism". And, I might add, one that
only a small percentage of network operators has. The others have to do
with 6to4 and 6in4 and perhaps nat/pt.

groet,
Pim
-- 
---------- - -    - - -+- - -    - - ----------
Pim van Pelt                 Email: pim@ipng.nl
http://www.ipng.nl/             IPv6 Deployment
-----------------------------------------------