[afripv6-discuss] Are AfriNic's /48 being filtered?

[Leo Vegoda]

Hi Jordi,

On 27 Aug 2007, at 12:43, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:

> Hi Leo,
>
> That will be an interesting discussion (RIRs guarantying  
> routability) and
> I'm not saying I'm necessarily for it.
>
> What I believe is that it seems a bit silly to me to make policies  
> that have
> lot's of chances to be useless. Having a /48 for a critical  
> infrastructure
> or PI, which both need to ensure that are reachable, is not good  
> versus the
> cost of using a /32. The balance in terms of "total cost" for the  
> community
> (wasting addresses vs. having lots of human resources educating or
> instructing people about what to filter, etc., time spent). I will  
> much
> prefer more relaxed policies even if they seem to be less  
> conservative in
> terms of IPv6 addressing space.

I am not sure whether we have enough data to know whether there is a  
general problem or just a few isolated incidents. I expect that there  
are more data from the ARIN region as they have made more IPv6 PI  
assignments and for a longer time. Maybe we should wait and see if we  
are just in a 'running in' period before proposing a change to the  
policy.

More importantly though, do you believe that operators are happy to  
carry /32 IPv6 PI prefixes but not /48 IPv6 PI prefixes?

Regards,

Leo Vegoda