[sig-policy] Re: Presentation for the Address Policy SIG
Izumi,
> As you have suggested, I think the terms "gTLD/ccTLC registries" and
> "NIR" avoids any confusion, so I will use them in my presentation.
>
> > > > i. /48 should be assigned to IX
> > > > Pros
> > > > - Can be assigned out of /32 reserved for IX assignments
> >
> >Just for your information current assignments are from a reserved /32.
> I see. Thanks for letting me know.
>
> In that case, I will remove this statement since the assignment size
> makes no big difference in this respect.
Just to be clear (I am not sure if we misunderstand each other)
a /64 is currently assigned for IXP-1, the next /64 for IXP-2 and so
forth. all this is from a reserved /32 which is 2001:07FA::/32 for all IXPs.
I suddenly got the feeling my previous comment wasnt clear and you
understood each IXP gets a /32 reserved for them. Sorry for any confusion.
> > > > - all IXs will receive the same assignment size throughout the
> > > > world
> > > > - it is the minumum size to be registered into DB
> > > > Cons
> > > > - Assignments have already been made
> > > > - /64 could meet the needs sufficiently
> >
> >It might be worth adding whether or not you plan to upgrade existing /64
> >holders into /48's - this would currently require renumbering as the
> >assignments are sequential.
> Yes, that is a good point.
>
> I will note in the presentation that the existing /64 holders may ask
> for an upgrade but renumbering would be required.
Seems a good idea.ie. give them the option.
> > > > iii./48 should be assigned to gTLD/ccTLD DNS
> <snip>
> > > > Pros
> > > > - Can be assigned out of /32 reserved for this purpose
> <snip>
> >What was the reasoning behind making the DNS assignments from two
> >separate reserved /32's? Could they be made from the same reserved
> >/32 to simplify filters etc.
> Sorry, this was simply the problem with the way I phrased it.
>
> My intention was to make assignments from the same reserved /32 as you
> have suggested. I will rephrase it as "Can be assigned out of /32
> reserved for micro allocations".
Ah yes. sounds good.
Best wishes,
Anne
--
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
* To unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe" to sig-policy-request at apnic dot net *