[6bone] pTLA request NDSOFTWARE - review closes 23 October 2002

[Bob Fink]

Pim,

Thanks for your comments. They (and others) will be taken into account 
before any pTLA is allocated.

I specifically try to stay quiet during the review phase to let folks make 
their cases. Comments and reasoned arguments, on both sides, do make a 
difference in the outcome. It is a collective process.


Thanks,

Bob

===
At 10:14 PM 10/20/2002 +0200, Pim van Pelt wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 06:25:47AM -0700, Bob Fink wrote:
>| 6bone Folk,
>Dear Bob,
>
>| NDSOFTWARE has requested a pTLA allocation and I find their request fully
>| compliant with RFC2772. The open review period for this will close 23
>| October 2002. Please send your comments to me or the list.
>
>In short: I oppose to this request also. Please read on.
>
>It's Sun Oct 20 when I'm writing this mail. I have read some 60 mails,
>most of which stick to the topic of DEFFAYETs request. Reading through
>them, I find it refreshing to see that many of the regular posters of
>this mailinglist seem to agree that it is not yet time to allocate a
>pTLA to NDSoftware or Nicolas.
>
>Last month, I saw a small thread on the lir-wg@ripe.net mailinglist,
>where Nicolas complained in this public forum about the fact that the
>NCC did not grant him an AS number request. NCC rectified their prior
>decision and allocated an AS number to NDSoftware. I still had my doubts.
>
>An autonomous system, in my book, is a set of routers which have the
>same routing policies implemented. Somehow, the routers in NDSoftware
>are not interconnected with private circuits (sdh/atm/ethernet). This
>means the IPv4 cloud at NDSoftware consists of one or more IPv4
>cloudlets (consisting of one machine each).
>
>I myself did check out the websites (fnix6 and ndsoftware) and did see
>mutitudes of 404's. I thought them to be typical of Nicolas' methodology.
>Connecting them together with IPv6 tunnels does not seem like a big
>deal. The current customer base is predominantly non-french/parisian.
>
>MEDs are multiple exit discriminators, used to steer traffic into some
>specific router if you have multiple BGP sessions between your AS and
>theirs.
>
>IPng does not have a pTLA nor an sTLA. They are simply a project running
>at the commercial ISP Intouch NV (AS8954) and they have a statically
>(and natively) routed /32 out of the Intouch pTLA. It is irrelevant and
>does not have to be dragged into the discussion just because Jeroen
>helps administer that project.
>
>I would like to personally thank John F (razier, look I spelled it
>correctly :) for his long list of terribly useful questions (posted in
>his mail with id g9K8gLo08725). I find DEFFAYETs replies to this mail
>defensive and evasive to say the least.
>
>I am not supportive of this request and protest against it because ever
>since I've seen Nicolas join 'the scene', I have seen him push his work
>forward using unorthodox methods. The most important one, is insisting
>on using AS65526 because -- as he said so himself -- RIPE refused to
>give him his own AS to run out of. During this phase, DEFFAYET kept on
>introducing more instabilities into the 'Net, as also made public at
>RIPE42 by Gert Doering.
>
>The reflection of the current setup at NDSoftware in the whois database
>is crappy. It seems like DEFFAYET was collecting /32s from other pTLA
>holders. We (the 6bone community) have requested him to clean up his act
>on numerous occasions and he simply refused.
>
>DEFFAYET has his own set of rules that he wishes to play by. I don't
>think (and urge you to note this), that the last point of rfc2772 states
>that the pTLA requestor will obide by the best common practice and
>cooperate with other 6BONE members. I don't believe that this was the
>case in the past, nor that it will be the case in the future.
>
>Please reconsider the pTLA allocation to NDSoftware.
>--
>---------- - -    - - -+- - -    - - ----------
>Pim van Pelt                 Email: pim@ipng.nl
>http://www.ipng.nl/             IPv6 Deployment
>-----------------------------------------------