[ppml] 2005-1 or its logical successor

[Stephen Sprunk]

Thus spake "Bill Woodcock" <woody at pch.net>
> So Chris Morrow and Mike Hughes and Thomas Narten and I were
> talking more about this over dinner, and I think the consensus out of
> that conversation was this:
>
> - an IPv6 direct-assignment policy should be based directly on the ipv4
>  direct-assignment policy, as closely as possible.

As far as initial qualification goes, but not in terms of size of 
allocation.

> - one-size-fits-all probably isn't useful in the long run.

Well, I think a minimum allocation of /48 is reasonable, with specific 
requirements on hosts/sites/segments/etc. only applicable if the requestor 
wants something larger.

> - host-counts are stupid.

Ditto.  But counting subnets might not be.

> - a strict multi-homing requirement is perfectly reasonable.
>
> - preexisting IPv4 deployment should qualify you for IPv6 assignment.

I hope you meant preexisting IPv4 _multihomed_ deployment.  Do we need to 
consider folks who intend to only deploy v6, or is that still fantasy for 
the next few years?

> - the size of the assignment should probably be /48 times the number of
>  sites you have already deployed.
>
> - in order to avoid creative interpretation of "sites," no more than one
>  site per metro area should be counted.  That's arbitrary, but it's an
>  objectively-verifiable quantity, which is what's needed for the ARIN
>  analyst staff.

We really need to get consensus on the definition of "site".  For instance, 
should McDonalds get a block for each city they have a restaurant in, even 
if they're all connected back to a handful of "hub" sites for 
{inter|intra}net access?  In contrast, should a Fortune 1000 company with 
large offices in NY, LA, Chicago, and Houston be considered a single "site" 
because they only have four locations of importance?

To me, a "site" is a network, however large, that has complete internal 
reachability and is effectively under a single administrative umbrella.  In 
fact, it's pretty close to the definition of an Autonomous System, but that 
may be an effect of current/past allocation policies clouding my thinking.

S

Stephen Sprunk        "Stupid people surround themselves with smart
CCIE #3723           people.  Smart people surround themselves with
K5SSS         smart people who disagree with them."  --Aaron Sorkin