Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

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

McTim dogwallah at
Fri Mar 23 14:12:07 UTC 2007

On 3/23/07, Colin Alston <colin at> wrote:
> ccTLD registrars

I think you mean registries here.

>are one example of people who *do* need their own IP
> space. They cannot rely on PA space because in the case of our

which is a SLD not a ccTLD.

> they don't peer with a provider in all cases,

do you mean they don't have an upstream provider?  Are they a Tier 1 then?

> they connect to an IXP

which is just where they peer.

> and need to be self sustaining.
> For other organizations which are large, and tedious renumber, the
> non-offering of PI space seems simply like a reason to force these
> people to have to do business with a single ISP or face losing their
> IP addresses.

Provider lock in is a consequence of aggregation.  IP addresses aren't
property, they can't be "owned", therefore they are not "their"

The "We hate renumbering" argument is not sufficient IMHO to undo the
many years of IETF work, where the notion of IPv6 PI was debated and
decided against.

> We do need PI space.

And the next x generations of network engineers will curse you for your "need".

Since ARIN folk have let the genie out of the bottle, we may as well
have PI in AfriNIC region as well.  I do want us to be conscious of
the road we are setting out on, considering carefully all of the
potential pitfalls, before we actually take the first step.


$ whois -h mctim

More information about the RPD mailing list