[6bone] non-global address space for IXs (was: 2001:478:: as /48)

[John Fraizer]

On Sat, 6 Sep 2003, Gregg C Levine wrote:

> Hello (again) from Gregg C Levine
> Would any of you mind doing me a favor, when this discussion reaches a
> good resting point? Please reiterate the whole series of things that
> led up to this discussion.
> 
> Oh, and on the sub-subject of ISPs, I happen to know from an earlier
> phone call with their support staff, that even though they provide DSL
> service for consumer AT&T customers, they haven't plans at the time to
> make available IPv6 services. I'm still working on that issue.
> -------------------
> Gregg C Levine hansolofalcon@worldnet.att.net


Bill Manning made a general announcement (like he has for the two previous
years) that folks *may* see chunks of 2001:478::/32 announced as /48's or
possibly /64's since it is divided into /48's and /64's for use at IX's
that go to EP.NET for address space management.  From there, the v6 police
decided that since folks can (now) get address space from the RIRs, that
every EP that gets address space from EP.NET should now renumber or that
someone should announce 2001:478::/32.  Nevermind that no ONE entity
currently has connectivity to every part of 2001:478::/32 or that this
address space has been in use at EPs since BEFORE the RIRs had made
address space available for use at IX's. (I don't care if they had policy
for it - they weren't handing out address space for this purpose yet.)

>From there, Jeroen demonstrated that he didn't understand how exchange
points REALLY work and the reason for having all participants in the
exchange point share not only the same L2 fabric but also the same L3 LIS
so that routes learned from the route-servers have next-hops that are
"connected" routes and do not require any further configuration on the
part of exchange point participants other than bringing up peering
session(s) with the route-server(s).

>From there, Jeroen decided to make anti-American remarks, blah blah blah
in reference to my lack of patience with people who want to bitch and moan
without being in possession of even a fraction of the clue required to
understand the technology involved and an obvious lack of experience
operating in the environment that address space carved out of
2001:478::/32 is implemented in.

It boils down to this: People took offense (for whatever reason) that a
single /32 (2001:478::/32) that was not part of address space carved out
by the RIRs for use at IX's was being used for addressing IX's.  Nevermind
the LONG history (pre IPv6) of EP.NET providing address space and
management of that address space for exchange points, nevermind the fact
that nobody is FORCING them to accept those /48's, nevermind
anything.  They simply wanted to get bent out of shape because someone
besides the RIRs was making address space (from a SINGLE /32) available
for use by folks who operate v6 exchange points.

Typical 6bone pissing and moaning if you ask me.

--
John Fraizer
EnterZone, Inc 
(13944+$|13944+_14813+$|13944+_17266+$)
PGP Key = 6C5903C4
Fingerprint = 2AA6 6614 1B5E EDD2 38AD C417 3E61 F975 6C59 03C4