Re: PI space under IPv6

Hi,

On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 09:51:41AM +0100, Roger Jorgensen wrote:
> I really wish people could stop using the phrases PI and PA when talking 
> about IPv6.

Given that the currently handed-out IPv6 addresses are provider 
aggregateable addresses (=PA), and that people are now working on having 
provider-independent addresses (=PI), the distinction makes very much sense.

Of course the PA/PI distinction doesn't make sense at the layer where
the RIR is handing them out - at that layer, it's just "chunks of addresses".

At the end-user layer, there is an important difference - a block tagged
"PA" can not and must not be moved to a different provider except the
one where it was received from, while a block tagged "PI" can.

[..]
> I don´t see any reason why implementing PI in IPv6 at all. Larger corp 
> should be able to get a IPv6 block and if it´s not possible, change the 
> policies so it become possible.
[..]
> PI will not be the solution.

Calling it "PI" or calling it "we open the policy so everybody can get
their own independent address block" is technically pretty much the same.

The tagging just makes it very clear to end-sites receiving PA blocks that 
there *is* a difference regarding portability.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  98999

SpaceNet AG                    Mail: [email protected]
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14      Tel : +49-89-32356-0
D- 80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-234

_______________________________________________
global-v6 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6