RE: RIR bashing, was: Routing table size?

["Jeroen Massar" <jeroen@unfix.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> Giving out /32s ONLY in IPv6 and /20s mostly in IPv4 isn't a good 
> policy. Sometimes people need to be globally visible without the need 
> for such a large block, and the largest ISPs burn through them fast 
> enough to warrant giving them much larger blocks.

http://www.sixxs.net/tools/grh/tla/all/ shows amongst others:

2001:d70::/30   NTTWEST-IPv6-JPNIC-JP-20030912
2001:1600::/31  NL-LIBERTEL-20030902

So getting them is certainly possible.

If you want to be 'visible' with a smaller block you are an
enduser and at the moment you are out of luck. But then again
I don't know any enduser type people having the connectivity
nor the need for their own routing. That's why I pay my upstreams
so they can handle all that stuff for me and I can sleep fine :)

Greets,
 Jeroen

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: Unfix PGP for Outlook Alpha 13 Int.
Comment: Jeroen Massar / jeroen@unfix.org / http://unfix.org/~jeroen/

iQA/AwUBP4lgyimqKFIzPnwjEQKONQCgqG8DFRAHuWt3S4Wa1lDOqYAbVB0Anjew
Ldzi33KIq0IK7m56CAUJQd11
=09M8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----