[6bone] RFC2772 rewrite -- bigger scope goals

[Nicolas DEFFAYET]

On Sat, 2002-11-16 at 16:23, Robert Kiessling wrote:
> Here is a rather radical proposal:
> 
>         Peerings between 6bone sites MUST NOT carry any other routes apart 
>         from 3FFE and a summary route for 2001/3.

You can have unstability problems with RIR space...


A lot of ISP use their RIR space for do experimental stuff (it's more
easy for a LIR to get a sTLA than a pTLA for do tests...)


pTLA owner have IPv6 experience:

>From RFC2772

   1. The pTLA Applicant must have a minimum of three (3) months
       qualifying experience as a 6Bone end-site or pNLA transit.   
       During the entire qualifying period the Applicant must be  
       operationally providing the following:


sTLA owner can don't have IPv6 experience because it's not a
requierement for get a sTLA.


I think that your solution is not good and will kill the 6bone.

Why limit 6bone space if the pTLA are expected to provide production
quality service ?

>From RFC2772:

   The following rules apply to qualify for a 6Bone pTLA allocation. It
    should be recognized that holders of 6Bone pTLA allocations are
    expected to provide production quality backbone network services for
    the 6Bone.


I think that it's better to remplace "6Bone pTLA allocations are
expected to provide production quality..." by "6Bone pTLA allocations
MUST provide production quality...".


I don't understand how RIR space can get problems with 6bone space...
Please explain me.

My router will don't do better announces with RIR space than 6bone
space....

-- 
Nicolas DEFFAYET, NDSoftware
NOC Website: http://noc.ndsoftwarenet.com/
FNIX6: http://www.fnix6.net/