[ppml] IP-v6 Needs (RE: a modified proposal 2005-8)

Howard, W. Lee Lee.Howard at stanleyassociates.com
Mon Mar 20 17:40:54 EST 2006

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On 
> Behalf Of Michael.Dillon at btradianz.com
> Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2006 6:27 PM
> To: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] IP-v6 Needs (RE: a modified proposal 2005-8)
> > Are you also saying that each /48 be provider independent? 
> No. The design of IPv6 says that the end-site uses /64 subnets
> within it's own network topology. Those /64 subnets allow each
> subnet to use provider independent addressing for the host-portion
> of the address, for instance they could use Ethernet MAC addresses
> as the stable portion of the address. For this to work, they need
> a fixed and predictable number of bits for working space, first
> for the host addressing and then for the subnetting in their
> own topology design. This subnetting is also intended to have
> space to evolve so that most organizations only need one allocation
> from either and RIR or a provider, during their lifetime.

I appreciate your patience with me on this.

Flight 1234 gets a /48.  Out of that /48, the air traffic control 
network has one /64, the air carrier network has another /64, and 
the entertainment network has a third?  So each of those networks 
has a /64 in its table, in addition to the aggregate /32?

Still assuming that the network carrier is the same as the service
provider, but I haven't heard anyone object to that assumption.
> > Buses, trains or train cars, ships, tandem bicycles.  Be
> > specific.
> I think that being specific is contrary to the goal of 
> coming up with a general policy that is not unnecessarily
> restrictive. It doesn't matter how the networks move around
> and what physical objects they are attached to. If the discussion
> gets to specific it always leads to corner cases which don't
> work. I don't believe it is possible to have a policy without
> corner cases where the policy doesn't work. In the past our
> policies have had issues, and over time, people either live
> with these issues or they come up with workable new policy
> proposals that improve the policy. This is a good thing.

Well said.

> --Michael Dillon


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list