[ppml] Various IPv6 issues

David Conrad drc at virtualized.org
Thu Aug 23 23:28:57 EDT 2007


On Aug 23, 2007, at 8:09 PM, mack wrote:
> 4) ARIN seems to be allocating on /29 boundaries to allow expansion  
> while maintaining aggregation.
> This is a good thing.  Obviously gaps can be filled in later if  
> needed.

I'm confused.

One of the justifications for the allocation of /12s to the RIRs was  
that the RIRs needed to use "bisection allocation" and they needed an  
insanely huge pool in order to facilitate this.

It does not appear that any of the RIRs are doing this.

This isn't a good thing.  If an LIR grows beyond a /29, that LIR will  
now need 2 prefixes.  If bisection had been used, ARIN could grow the  
single prefix.

Is how ARIN allocates prefixes to LIRs a policy issue or an  
operational issue?

> Example with two locations, 2 transit providers and a link:
> Transit1 in location A.
> Transit2 in location B.
> Transport between A and B via Layer 2 connection (billed at 95th).
> Advertising the same prefix in both locations means that traffic
> from Transit2 will exit only in location B.
> But may actually be destined for A.
> The obvious solution is to apply for a second /32.


> I am not sure how ARIN expects these aspects to be handled.

I'm not sure this is an ARIN issue.  Rather I suspect it is a  
protocol issue (currently being discussed in the ram at iab.org and  
rrg at psg.com).


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list