Kosuke Ito wrote:
- What would be the minimum registration requirements per endsite?
A suggestion JPNIC has is to allow all dynamic assignments and /64s to
be aggregated as LIR's infrastructure, but require all other
assignments per endsite, to be consistent with v4.
Would there be any particular motivation to deviate from a practice that
is consistent with Ipv4? (I can't think of any at this stage.)
The reason I can think of is the overall size of the IPv6 space. If people
starts registering /64s and smaller assignments to the NIR/RIR, our disk storage
will fill up rather quickly and the utilization calculation will take longer.
I'm not saying this can't be done.
Considering that the registration requirement primary reason is to measure
utilization, how about aggregating the assignment report to whatever size the HD
ratio calculation is based on? And can we confirm that it is now based on /56?
I understand the registration requirement as for clarifying who is in
responsible of the address space as well as for calculating utilization.
Assuming this is the case, wouldn't it blur who is responsible for the
address space if we allow aggregation in /56?
I agree.
There is no technical reason to say which size.
It is the matter of balancing between how precisely RIR/NIR need
to know the utilization of allocated address space and how easy
each LIR report/register it with the reasonably low overhead.
Kosuke
Good points Izumi and Kosuke. Other than potential disk space and calculation
issues (not an insurmountable issue whatsoever), I have no objections to either
use the current IPv4 registration requirement or amend it to encourage/require
aggregation at the infrastructure level.
Cheers,
Sanjaya
--
________________________________________________________________________
Sanjaya email: sanjaya@apnic.net
Technical Services Manager, APNIC sip: sanjaya@voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net phone: +61 7 3858 3100
________________________________________________________________________