[6bone] Exchange Point Addresses

[Pim van Pelt]

On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 03:43:07PM -0700, Michel Py wrote:
| Pim and 6boners,
| 
| > Pim van Pelt wrote:
| > As with your collegues at AMS-IX (NL), you will simply be left
| > out in the cold. When you approach a registry with a remark like
| > you just made, you will be told that you are no more special than
| > any other company that wishes to have their own globally routable
| > space (call it PI, call it TLA).
| > At current, at least in the region I am active in (RIPE), IXPs
| > cannot obtain address space without becoming dependant on a member.
| > By the way, neither can the RIR itself.
| 
| The ipv6mh list is working hard to provide you with geographical
| addresses so you don't stay in the cold too long. An example is
| available here:
| http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/geov6.txt

I browsed through this allocation document. Nice work!
What are the aggregation policies with these networks ? I see that the
smallest allocation to cities would be /32. Who would announce for
example the NL-Amsterdam block 2346:7600::/29 ? If it is anybody other
than AS1200, in the case of AMS-IX, then they would be dependent on that
particular AS (and most probably, the member operating that AS).

Can you point me to a document that explains how this will solve the
dependency issue raised ?

Thanks, groet,
Pim


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