Re: [sig-policy] prop-082: Removing aggregation criteria for IPv6 initia
On 19/02/2010, at 3:52 PM, (Tomohiro -INSTALLER- Fujisaki/藤崎 智宏) wrote:
>
> I have no example about that. I think currently, there are not so many
> subsequent allocation in IPv6, and filters will be based on the
> minimum allocation size, such as /32.
>
> # I'd found there were some (many?) specific routes perhaps in
> # initial allocation blocks.
>
>
> At least I've heard discussions in an LIR about IPv6 de-aggregation and
> initial and subsequent allocation policy description. Personally, I think
> current policy description, which clearly stated aggregation requirement
> in one case, and no such description in another leads some people think
> in later case de-aggregation is permitted.
>
I think in this instance, that the policy waters are too murky and all aggregation requirements should be uniformly removed - I further consider that this proposal would be complementary to prop-83.
>
> I understand your point about a number of routes which will appear in
> IPv6 world, and I agree your estimation. They will be closer to a
> number of ASes (but upper limit is extended to 32bit:-)).
>
:-)
>
> OK, I'll add to my proposal document.
:-)
Cheers