[resource-policy] AfriNIC Policy Proposal: IPv6 ProviderIndependent (PI) Assignment for End-Sites

[Vincent Ngundi]

Hi Andrew,

On Jan 30, 2007, at 11:22 AM, Andrew Alston wrote:

> Hi Vincent,
>
>
>
> I’m ok with all of this except for the following:
>
>
>
> * The intial provider independent assignment size to an end-site  
> should be a /48, or a shorter/longer prefix if the end-site can  
> justify it.
>
>
>
> I’m happy with /48s, I’m even happier with bigger blocks, but there  
> should *NEVER* be a situation where the block is smaller than this  
> in the global routing tables.  If the blocks can ever be smaller  
> than /48 in size it is going to create major BGP filtering headaches.
>
>
We covered the *smaller than* allocation to cater for end-sites such  
as IXP's. It's an option.

-v
>
>
> Can this wording be clarified?
>
>
>
> Many Thanks
>
>
>
> Andrew Alston
>
> TENET – Chief Technology Officer
>
> _______________________________________________
> resource-policy mailing list
> resource-policy at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/resource-policy

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20070130/6b1856d6/attachment.html>