[ppml] 2005-1 status
billd at cait.wustl.edu
Tue Jan 24 09:00:54 EST 2006
> > Why should the criteria for PI in v6 be ANY different than with v4?
> > What was large under v4 is somehow not large under v6
> apparently? Turn
> > in you v4 PI block for a v6 PI block.
> OK, assuming that we accept this, the only additional
> thing that needs to be decided is what size of v6 PI
> block to give.
> Why should the method of sizing these v6 blocks be
> ANY different than the existing method of sizing
> v6 blocks? Either these applicants are LIRs and
> get a /32 or they are not and they get a /48 unless
> they can show that they are VERY LARGE SUBSCRIBERS.
I assume you mean v4 in your second reference in the above paragraph?
I don't think the argument is about PI block size. Rather, it is about
making PI space available to end-sites...Only once that hurdle is crossed,
can a discussion of PI block size be entertained and given that the current
size for PA to end-sites starts at a base of /48 and gets larger with
justification, there may be no issue.
> This is in accord with the existing v6 policy. Since
> the proposal is to change the existing policy, it really
> should be clear about which bits are being changed and
> why those changes are justified.
> --Michael Dillon
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net
More information about the ARIN-PPML