[ppml] 2005-1 status

Stephen Sprunk stephen at sprunk.org
Mon Jan 30 17:45:39 EST 2006

Thus spake "Kevin Loch" <kloch at hotnic.net>
> Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> Are we really proposing that a leaf organization get a /48 per location?
> My memory of the last meeting is a bit foggy but I distinctly remember
> that as a suggestion by several people.  I think it came out of the
> "one size does not fit all", and "host counts are stupid, why not
> count subnets or locations" train of thought.

I agree that one size doesn't fit all, but I think it's more relevant to 
count the number of subnets than the number of street addresses (or hosts).

>> Think about it: McDonalds would qualify for a /31 (or so) under this
>> proposal, as much or more than most ISPs.  They'd be able to
>> assign a /64 to _every hamburger they sell_, not just the stores.
>> While I'm sure that would be entertaining, is this a reasonable policy
>> direction?
> I'm not privy to how they connect their resturaunts.

I'm not either; I just picked a random large company I don't have an NDA 

> It is conceivable that each franchise would be responsible for getting
> internet service on their own.  In that case you would have a /48 per
> restaurant.

It is typical (I'm not aware of any exceptions, but I'm sure there is one 
somewhere) for large chains to provide a private FR/ATM/MPLS network 
connection to each location, regardless of whether it's owned or a 
franchise, with multihomed Internet access points at several regional data 

However, if McD's franchisees were to acquire their own Internet access, 
they'd almost assuredly be in an ISP's PA space, so they're a moot point. 
The owned stores (30% of locations) would still be enough for McD's to get 
an absurdly large PI allocation under this proposal, though.  That's what 
I'm addressing (no pun intended) here: giving McD's a /64 for every burger 
they sell is excessive (or Starbucks and lattes, etc).  Sure, there's a lot 
of IPv6 space, but do we need to go out of our way to assign it all?

> If The parent corp was providing IPv6 to each resturaunt they could
> become an LIR, get a /32 and issue /48's to franchisees who are separate
> organizations.

Good point; if McD's decided to be an ISP, they could easily get PI space 
under existing policies.  Bad choice of example, I now see, but the argument 
in general is still valid if you ignore franchises and/or if the parent org 
doesn't want to be an LIR.


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 

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list