[131513] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 Routing table will be bloated?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jack Bates)
Tue Oct 26 14:23:04 2010
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 13:22:46 -0500
From: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net>
To: Randy Carpenter <rcarpen@network1.net>
In-Reply-To: <41122024.13163.1288116066323.JavaMail.root@zimbra.network1.net>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 10/26/2010 1:01 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>
> Wait... If you are issuing space to ISPs that are multihomed, they
> should be getting their own addresses. Even if they aren't
> multihomed, they should probably be getting their own addresses. Why
> would you be supplying them with address space if they are an ISP?
>
Because they are my customer. They don't know much about RIRs, paying
membership fees, etc. They just know they want address space, and I
provide that.
1) Policy doesn't state that only a RIR can hand address space to an ISP
2) You don't have to be multihomed to be considered an ISP or qualify
for space from RIR (you just have to be larger if you aren't multihomed)
3) It has been this way for many years in IPv4, with all of my customers
being ISPs from small to medium size and several of them even having
their own subtending ISPs (some of which are even larger than my
customer ISP in consumer customer counts).
Jack
