[ppml] IPv6 assignment - proposal for change to nrpm

[Stephen Sprunk]

Thus spake "William Herrin" <arin-contact at dirtside.com>
> On 10/18/07, Scott Leibrand <sleibrand at internap.com> wrote:
>> This change is not wise.  For better or worse, IPv6 was designed with
>> the last 64 bits as the "host" portion of the address, and there are a
>> number of IPv6 features (such as address autoconfiguration and
>> cryptographically generated addresses) that need those bits to
>> function.  We should not be issuing guidelines that encourage ISPs to
>> assign addresses in such a way as to eliminate the ability to use such
>> features.
>
> I concur. ARIN should not offer guidelines which conflict with the
> IETF's adoption of /64 as the standard subnet mask. On the other
> hand, we shouldn't discourage such use either. I've heard more than
> a few excellent arguments that the adoption of /64 as the netmask
> was ill advised and should not be followed.

It was, perhaps, ill-advised, but it _is_ the standard and there doesn't 
appear to be any consensus within the IETF for changing it.  There is no 
technical or political justification for us overriding the IETF in this 
case. unlike in the case of PIv6, so we should continue to follow that 
recommendation until the IETF changes it.

S

Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking