[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv6 Assignment Guidelines

[michael.dillon at bt.com]

> I don't support this policy.

I also don't support it.

> If it's still deemed 
> desireable to make the standard assignment for residential 
> users smaller than that, I recommend a /60 

I disagree. ARIN has already settled on a /56 and the IETF consensus
that all sites should be /48 is a bit more wobbly when it comes to
consumer sites, i.e. homes and apartments. Many of the IETF members who
agree that there is no technical reason to not do /48 everywhere, will
also admit that using /56 for consumer subscribers only, is not going to
create problems.

> because this is 
> large enough to accommodate a fairly big home network (I have 
> 5 Cisco routers and 2 wifi base stations in my house and 
> never used more than 4 subnets) but small enough that people 
> won't be tempted to cram a corporate network in it, only to 
> grow out of it anyway and needing a rather painful 
> renumbering operation (which would be a significant risk with 
> assigning /56s).

And there is a prime example of why a /56 for consumers only, will not
create problems. It is exceedingly rare for a private home or apartment
to turn into a business. For the very, very few who do this, there may
be some pain, but that does not warrant a change in the public policy.
Since there is no penalty to ISPs for assigning a /48 to a home user,
anyone who anticipates building a corporate network in their basement or
spare bedroom, should ask their ISP for a /48. Problem solved.

--Michael Dillon