* Wilfried Woeber:
From that perspective I seem to see 2 aspects in the recent discussion:
- you shall not receive address space for builing a service, you are to buy that from some "big-folk".
This is an intersting point of view, and taken to the extreme will make us end up with a _very small_ number of _very big_ entities.
Traditionally these things were called monopolies. Nothing I would be too happy to see coming back ;-)
Oligopolies is the term, I think. IPv6 addressing policy seems to be geared towards that. We know from the IPv4 experience that 20,000+ indepedent entities in the global routing table can be handled easily. So why not try to duplicate this success?
- there has been th discussion regarding "anycast" but isnt this just a special(?) case of th PI-topic?
It depends on the PI criteria. If slots in the global routing tables are kept in short supply *and* you get at most one if you aren't an ISP *and* you need to do IPv6 anycast, you might have a problem because you need two globally visible prefixes (one for your production network, one for anycast). But I think you are right that it makes sense to resolve the PI first, either negatively or positively.