[ppml] 2005-1 and/or Multi6

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Fri Apr 15 16:46:37 EDT 2005

> No, at the end of the day it does not. Today it does, but
> we are making an IPv6 policy that should last for many years.
> I don't expect router design to stand still during that time
> and I also don't expect any router vendors to reveal what
> they are working on in their research labs. At the end of
> the day, it is possible to optimize by processing fewer bits
> and we should not remove that option from the table by
> making bad policy and introducing yet another class of
> IPv6 address.
No.  We should, today, make policy based on our best knowledge of the
facts today and our reasonable expectations of the future.  Your theory
of where routers might go is not what we should base policy on.  Are you
involved in router design or development?

There is a policy process to allow us to change policy in the future
if needs change.  Since these addresses can be reclaimed and/or renumbered
based on annual renewal and expiration, this creates a maximum 2 year
lag between new policy and conversion.

Again, having talked to some ASIC designers and a few people I know who
code for FPGAs, they say that there is little to no difference in efficiency
between sorting a sparsely populated 64 bit table and a sparsely or
densly populated 32 bit table.  They also state that lookups are not
significantly less efficient.  Yes, at the micro-level, there is some small
difference in speed, but, not enough to be worth the tradeoff, especially
if they have to handle exceptions for longer prefixes anyway.

>> Given that 64k subnets is
>> enough for most and that allocations made using RFC3531 will extend the
>> initial /48 to a /47 for the few large organizations that require it, I
>> don't see any advantages in giving /32s away to sites.
> If an organisation has an AS number then their network is not
> a "site". 
This is an utterly invalid assertion.  I know several organizations that
have ASNs which are single sites, and, a few which have multiple sites
each of which is a separate AS.  There is nothing in policy which says
you cannot be a single site and get an AS.  You can multihome a site.
If you multihome, you are entitled to an AS.


If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20050415/a642c8e7/attachment-0001.sig>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list