RE: Draft: PI addressing derived from AS numbers

["Michel Py" <michel@arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>]

Pekka,

>> Michel Py wrote:
>> This would create a terrible precedent. In the long run, we can
>> expect:
>> - People that have swamp space lobbying for v6 PI also, on the
>> grounds that if people that have an ASN get v6 PI space they
>> should get it too. Actually, swamp space holders have on paper
>> a better reason than ASN holders to get v6 PI space.

> Pekka Savola wrote:
> Uhh, what do you mean by swamp space holders, those that don't
> have ASN? Multihomers that use private ASN's or static routing
> and have their primary ISP advertise a more specific?

Someone please debunk me if I'm wrong, but I think that swamp space was
allocated without the current restrictions of either having a distinct
routing policy or being multihomed. This means that they are a few guys
that still have swamp space (a class C, for the most part) and don't
have an AS. These guys are not multihomed, they just have their ISP
announce their swamp prefix and have the luxury of switching ISPs
without renumbering, which is exactly what PI is about: one _OWNS_ the
address.

> GAPI is a new term to me.
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-py-multi6-gapi-00.txt
Beta allocation:
http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/geov6.txt

Michel.