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

[Frank Habicht]

Jordi,

JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
> Hi Leo,
> 
> I see your point. However, I already got similar inputs from some people in
> ARIN region. This doesn't mean that with the time the situation can change,
> but the issue is that the policy *today* is not so useful as it should be
> and didn't help the provision of critical IPv6 services,

I think the policy _did_ help.
like that: uniforum would right now be ipv4 only, if it wasn't for the
policy.


> moreover, can be
> against the stability of the deployment and raise negative view from service
> providers and customers "oh, it doesn't work because it is IPv6, it is
> broken".

They can say so. Freedom of speech. Doesn't make it true though (in my
universe).

> I think operators had been educated to allow /32 or shorter prefixes, and
> there will be a hard time to re-educate them. Not really sure if they are
> unhappy with longer prefixes, but probably many of them want to make sure to
> avoid more-specifics and PI may look like that, so somehow, yes, they may be
> reluctant (and then not just and education issue) to carry prefixes longer
> than /32.

Just think of it as introducing classless routing in ipv6.
(there's an idea!)
it was possible in v4.

Frank