<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 2/5/2010 11:50 AM, Bob Atkins wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4B6C7679.7040709@digilink.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Given the enormous amount of IPv6 address space that is available I
don't understand why there would be the need for a rigorous, IPv4 level
of review, which you seem to imply the need for a significant amount of
staff to handle such reviews. I would think that basic delegation
analysis would likely suffice and I do understand that some personnel
are necessary. However, its not like doling out another /32 to /22 IPv6
allocation is going to have much of an impact on the reserves of IPv6
space.<br>
<br>
With our /32 IPv6 allocation, I don't expect to need another IPv6
allocation until we have grown about 1000 times larger than we are
which, (sadly) is unlikely to occur in my lifetime. :-( I suspect that
this would be the case for virtually all regional ISPs the world over
leaving just a handful of very large telcos that may need another
allocation after their initial /22 - perhaps by the year 2150... ;-)<br>
<br>
Given the existing 'standard' that almost 99% of enterprise customers
have of using NAT for IPv4 based on the 'security' benefits that NAT
offers - we rarely assign much more than a /29 of IPv4 space to our
enterprise customers. The typical IT geek is often horrified by the
idea of having 'real' IP address space internally. While we ISPs are
being asked to head down the IPv6 path, I find it likely that we may
end up using <u><i><b>microscopic</b></i></u>
amounts of it assigned to customer router interfaces that just want to
NAT everything internally to private IPv4 space. I don't think I'm
alone in this observation and I really think that it may be <i><u><b>decades</b></u></i>
before IPv6 utilization rises to the level of present day IPv4
utilization so I kinda doubt there are going to be very many additional
IPv6 allocation requests any time in the next say, 20 or 30 years.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Bob (and everyone else),<br>
<br>
If you're not already, I would encourage you to participate in the
public policy process, which sets the policy
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six">https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six</a>) for how rigorous the
requirements are for getting IPv6 space. There are a number of policy
proposals and draft policies under consideration
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/">https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/</a>) that would simplify those
requirements. Your participation
(<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.arin.net/participate/how_to_participate.html">https://www.arin.net/participate/how_to_participate.html</a>) would be
highly valuable in considering whether to adopt those changes, and for
considering any other policy ideas you might have.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Scott<br>
</body>
</html>