[ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv6 HD ratio
gih at apnic.net
Tue May 10 16:18:45 EDT 2005
At 03:21 AM 11/05/2005, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>In a message written on Tue, May 10, 2005 at 06:55:31AM -1000, Randy Bush
> > i suspect that some folk may not understand all of the implications.
> > heck, i probably don't. but one would seem to be that it makes it
> > even harder for the smaller folk and not too much harder for the larger.
>I have wondered why we don't use a flat measurement as we already
>do, simply relaxed to fit the additional v6 "free use of IP addresses".
>I have yet to see a good argument that large ISP's have significantly
>more waste. Most of them are based on IPv4 notions, where if you
>allocate a /20 to a POP to aggregate you have to justify all of the
>/20. In IPv6 you allocate it a /48 and that's that. Remembering
>that we're talking about allocated, and not in use, and from that
>perspective it seems IPv6 should be more efficient than IPv4, based
>on the current guidelines.
>I don't know what the number should be, but I'm thinking 50-65%.
I would encourage you to have a look through the presentation
for a background to this area of consideration.
More information about the ARIN-PPML