[ppml] How many IPv6 bits do you get without public scrutiny?

Perhaps it would be useful and inform the discussion if ARIN staff could 
comment on the number of large allocations (>/32, >/28, >/24, etc.), and 
provide (probably anonymized) justification details for some of them?

-Scott

michael.dillon at bt.com wrote:
>> In fact, I'm half tempted to propose policy that makes the 
>> justification documents for any IPv6 allocation or assignment 
>> shorter than /24 subject to public review.
>>     
>
> The fact is that we give ISPs a /32 because that seems big enough for
> most service providers. For most of them it is more than enough. But we
> currently have policy that gives really big ISPs more bits in one block
> because this is less wasteful. But in IPv6 "wasteful" is defined
> differently from IPv4. Perhaps the very concept of giving more than a
> /32 is wasteful. Or perhaps there is another boundary such as the /24
> which Owen mentions, beyond which we are being wasteful. If you stick
> with the 4-bit nibble boundaries that came out of the /56 discussions,
> then perhaps the RIRs should only have discretion to increase that /32
> to a /28 but no larger unless there is a public discussion and some kind
> of policy approval. After all, the IPv6 space is a public resource and
> for one organization to grab a huge chunk of it, relative to everybody
> else's chunk, seems to me to be a public policy issue.
>   

> So there are two questions. Is there a boundary beyond which an RIR
> cannot allocate a single large block to one organization? And should we
> allow the /32 boundary to be shoved up a bit at a time, or only a whole
> nibble?
>