[afnog] New IPv6 Address Block Allocated to the RIPE NCC

[Filiz Yilmaz]

Hi,

As Geoff and Adiel have already pointed and referred to, we are
allocating IPv6 space following the current policy which you can
find at:

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6policy.html

LIRs receive allocations based on this policy as they justify
their needs.

There is a policy proposal to have some changes on this current
policy. You can find it at:

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2005-08.html

The proposal is in discussion phase and for those interested the
discussions can be followed from Address Policy WG mailing list
and from its archives at:

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/maillists/archives/address-policy-wg/index.html

Kind regards,

--
Filiz Yilmaz
RIPE NCC


On 2006-01-03 11:11:03 +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> [Filiz, I guess an explanation why certain organizations are getting big
> blocks is in place as there seem to be quite some negative comments on it]
> 
> Brian Candler wrote:
> > [cc list trimmed]
> > 
> > On Sat, Dec 31, 2005 at 10:51:51AM +0100, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> >> Cheered to early, it's just a big block again:
> >>
> >> inet6num:       2a01:c000::/19
> >> netname:        FR-TELECOM-20051230
> >> descr:          France Telecom
> > 
> > Wonder how FT managed to justify a /19? That's the same as 8,192 ISPs each
> > with a standard /32. Or assuming an 80% utilisation rate, it means they are
> > planning to connect 429 million customers with a /48 each over the next two
> > years. Right.
> 
> Something along those lines, but I am pretty sure they met all of the
> constraints that RIPE has put on them. Also note that IPv6 allocations
> are based on an HD ratio and not utilization.
> 
> Don't forget the aggregation part and that France has about 60 million
> inhabitants(*). Also calculate into that growth for the future.
> 
> Then again France Telecom is in the same league as:
> 2003::/19 	[de] DE-TELEKOM-20050113
> 2001:2000::/20 	[eu] EU-TELIANET-20040510
> 2001:8000::/20 	[au] TELSTRAINTERNET41-AU-20041202
> 2400::/20 	[kr] KORNET-KRNIC-KR-20050601
> 2400:2000::/20 	[jp] SBB-IPv6-20050712
> 2001:5000::/21 	[xx] EU-EN-20040910
> 2001:a000::/21 	[jp] NTTWEST-IPv6-JPNIC-JP-20041201
> 
> And a number of other /22's. FT is not the first to get a /19, the
> Germans (83m population) already beat them with that ;)
> 
> > That's going to throw a spanner in the works - now every two-bit wannabe ISP
> > will want a /19 to compete in the routing tables.
> 
> *EHM* I don't think you should call France Telecom a "two-bit wannabe
> ISP"... Anybody who can justify address space and pays the bills gets
> the address space. Simple(tm)
> 
> > I guess the advantage is
> > that it will make IPv6 address depletion happen just as fast as IPv4, and so
> > we'll have a new chance to design a protocol which actually solves the
> > problems of IPv4...
> 
> I guess you don't see how vastly large the IPv6 address space is.
> All current allocations are happening from 2000::/3(**), the "Global
> Unicast" space. A /19 is only (19-3 = 16 -> 2^16 ->) 1/65536th of that
> part of the address space.
> 
> Now lets say that 65k companies get such a prefix then the 2000::/3
> prefix is full and everybody knows that this attempt failed. We can then
> move forward to the other 7 /3 prefixes and make a much better policy
> for those. Also note that there is already work being done on changing
> the HD ratio which will result in smaller allocations being given out to
> endsites.
> 
> Greets,
>  Jeroen
> 
> * http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/fr.html
>   http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/gm.html
>   http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/
> ** http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-address-space
>