[ppml] /48 vs /32 micro allocations, answer: /48

Paul Vixie paul at vix.com
Thu Mar 17 09:51:39 EST 2005

> > ... i'd agree with that statement, which differs from a general
> > endorsement of /48's as you appeared to be making earlier.
> Not a personal endorsement, just a summary of the responses
> so far to the question: "Should we allocate something larger
> than /48 for microallocs in case they have bad side effects?"
> All the responses so far have been emphatically "No!"

which is another statement i'd agree with that's different from
the one i challenged.

> I am still concerned about possible side effects that are
> unique to /48: Having to accept millions of deaggregated
> /48's to get the best/only route to sites with traffic
> engineered/orphaned routes.  I'm not saying that larger
> microallocs will prevent that, because there certainly
> are other forces at work, only that they *might*
> reduce/delay/prevent it.

the policy under consideration amounts to:

    we're not going to get deployment in V6 without a swamp.
    but, let's try to give this swamp a boundary smaller than
    V4's swamp.  and, let's not give early adopters full sized
    blocks unless they qualify.  so, for now, let's do /48's.

to me this has all the earmarks of good policy.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list