Biggest mistake for IPv6: It's not backwards compatible, developers admit

[S.P.Zeidler]

Hi,

Thus wrote Leo Vegoda (leo.vegoda at icann.org):

> On 31/03/2009 10:00, "S.P.Zeidler" <spz at serpens.de> wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Traditionally, in the RIPE region (not counting historical PI from before
> > PA was invented), the way to get PI space in v4 is to get an AS first
> > (or mostly, to get an AS and the PI space to route with it as a bundle).
> 
> I recall networks qualifying for exactly as much IPv4 PI space as they would
> qualify for PA space without a multi-homing requirement. So very small
> networks might well only get a /29 of PI space.
>
> This high granularity of PI assignments was a possibly a disincentive to an
> excessive number of requests. Or it might have encouraged people to inflate
> the interface count to something more than 128, ensuring a /24 assignment.

Even back when I was an active LIR hostmaster (1998-2001 roughly) it was
more theoretically possible than practical to get PI without the reason
'multihoming' being in evidence. I somehow doubt that changed into the
direction of easier availability :) And I distinctly remember a case with
a PI request where the 3 year plans would have been covered by a /25, but
the argument of routability yielded the customer a /24 (after some
extended complaining at the responsible hostmaster @RIPE, granted).

> In any case, it looks like the number of PI assignments exceeded the number
> of PA allocations back in 2003:
> 
> http://ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-54/presentations/RIPE_NCC_Statistics.pdf
> (slide 9)

If that really is all the requestor will need, it does save address space.

> I note that RIPE policy proposal 2006-05 would set the minimum assignment
> size to /24 in some multi-homing cases. On the other hand, things seem to be
> changing in a way that assigns a higher ongoing cost to PI assignments,
> which might balance out the equation somewhat.

It would certainly remove the "pay once, own forever" lure of PI space over
a PA allocation that currently is in effect.

regards,
	spz
-- 
spz at serpens.de (S.P.Zeidler)