[ppml] 2005-1:Business Need for PI Assignments
kloch at hotnic.net
Fri Apr 22 11:49:01 EDT 2005
Michael.Dillon at radianz.com wrote:
> If a company receives an AS number then they can announce
> any number of prefixes into the global routing table. Why not
> give them a /32 knowing that in 99% of the cases, this
> company will never need an additional allocation and will
> therefore only need to announce one route entry? That does
> conserve a dimension in tension.
We have already covered the idea of using /32 for any and
all RIR allocations. It's not politically viable, and
there were some technical concerns raised. Go back
and read the /48 vs /32 thread. There wasn't a single
post in support of using /32 for non-ISP allocations.
> God help us if we start to hand out /44's and then 5 years
> from now someone creates an IPv6 application that results in
> large numbers of /48 assignments, causing all the /44 allocations
> to run out and get a second one. Then, when we see the problem
> and adjust that /44 boundary up to /32, these organizations will
> once again overflow their 2nd /44 and get a 3rd /32 allocation.
> And then we realize that it is virtually impossible to renumber
> this application because it involves IPv6 addresses configured
> into hardware devices that have no central management capability.
> So now we have consumed 3 times as many global routing table entries
> as we would have by BEING CONSERVATIVE AND GIVING EVERYONE A /32!
This is easially solved by using a sparse allocation method that
reserves a /32 around each /44, just in case the orgainization
changes from an incidental aggregator to a primary aggregator.
More information about the ARIN-PPML