Randy Bush wrote:
Leo Vegoda wrote:
On 02/12/2008 11:48, "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com> wrote:
I can only second Niels here. While organizing conferences and events with network infrastructure myself, I can tell that it is a hassle to re-arrange temporary PI every time... so I do see the incentive. But why should the NCC be a special case and no one else?
Elisa Jasinska wrote: perhaps someone could phrase the general case? I thought 2006-01 is the general case. If it's not, I'd appreciate an explanation of why it cannot be.
i suspect that the ncc, perhaps andrei, would be the one to answer this, not i.
but i can see having a meeting net address (4 and 6) and asn set lying around for folk to use, with some way to grab/schedule the token for two weeks (one setup and one show).
That could work, generally the meetings are all aligned on the calendar anyway so that they don't collide. Only thing then, just like temporary space, is that you will have to get route filters updated (as your transit will be different, but with a moving network those things change anyway) etc etc etc. But all those problems should be doable. The question then still is, what is the difference between this special /48 or a /48 that one can get from the upstream provider? (Except for the first effectively being PI) As the RIPE NCC/"Meeting Organizer" is so intent on having this special prefix, I think it is up to them to properly define first what all the reasoning they have what and why, then we can discuss everything further. Greets, Jeroen