[arin-discuss] Size Categories for IPv6.

Tue Apr 19 07:39:30 EDT 2011

Good morning:

What I would like to see is when an IPv6 block is offered to a client that
the block be defined in at least one of two groups.  Companies like GE, IBM,
Wal-Mart are looking to use IPv6 addresses for RFID price tags.  

So these companies will have blocks from ARIN, and never intend to announce
them in BGP.  So let's know that all IPv6 addresses starting with D and E
are non-BGP Tags; never to be announced.  With over 4 billion /32 routes
knowing that GE is using an IPv6 range for RFID tags would be impossible to
keep track of. 

So Spammers and others could steal the RFID IPv6 subnets and you are now
being SPAMMED by a GE Refrigerator.   The change would be easy, just ask the
question what are you using the IPv6 for if not routing to the Internet
change the first letter.

I would like to do something similar with the new range of BGP AS numbers.
There we could use the 1,776,000,000 to 1,776,999,999 set aside as Private
for MPLS and other services that need more than the 65000 range in the older
AS range.

George Morton, Ph. D.

Dual CCIE 18532, Router/Switch & Security

Optimizing IP Enterprise Solutions

954-591-8532 Google Voice

Description: little R-S-Sec

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or
privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use
of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or
entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received
this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all
computers.

From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net]
On Behalf Of Scott Morris
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 4:12 PM
To: arin-discuss at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Size Categories for IPv6.

I believe that the proposed changes make more sense.

My two cents anyway!

Scott Morris, CCIEx4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,

CCDE #2009::D, JNCIE-M #153, JNCIE-ER #102, CISSP, et al.

CCSI #21903, JNCI-M, JNCI-ER

swm at emanon.com

Knowledge is power.

Power corrupts.

Study hard and be Eeeeviiiil......

On 4/18/11 3:54 PM, cja at daydream.com wrote: 

There was a recent policy proposal (138) to try to change the size
categories for IPv6 allocations.  It was abandoned by the AC because it is a
pricing matter but I wanted to start up a discussion here to perhaps give
ARIN guidance as to how the community feels about changing the sizes.   

Currently the IPv6 size categories are

Size Category

Fee (US Dollars)

Block Size

X-small

$1,250

smaller than /40

Small

$2,250

/40 to /32

Medium

$4,500

/31 to /30

Large

$9,000

/29 to /27

X-large

$18,000

/26 to /22

XX-large

$36,000

/22 and larger

IPv6 Annual FeeS (NOTE: FEE WAIVERS IN EFFECT)

The proposal was to change them as follows

X-small

          /32 or smaller

Small

          /31 to /30

Medium

          /29 to /27

Large

          /26 to /24

X-large

          /23 to /20

XX-large

          /20 and larger

Thanks!

----Cathy

_______________________________________________
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20110419/f7149525/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5061 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20110419/f7149525/attachment.jpg>