[ppml] IPv6 assignment - proposal for change to nrpm
arin-contact at dirtside.com
Sun Oct 21 01:59:58 EDT 2007
On 10/20/07, briand at ca.afilias.info <briand at ca.afilias.info> wrote:
> > This is a very bad idea. The requirement that a "minumum" end-user site
> > assignment of a /64 is the only thing that will permit many Legacy /24
> > holders (such as myself) who are single-homed use IPv6 at all.
> I'm interested in understanding this proposition.
> Can you explain why you believe /24 Legacy holders would not be able to
> use, for example, a /120?
Given that we could assign a /48 to every individual who has ever
lived without filling a /14, and given that the IETF has defined
standards that only work properly when the subnet mask is /64, I'm
curious why you'd want to buck the IETF on the recommendation against
assigning prefixes longer than /64?
William D. Herrin herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
More information about the ARIN-PPML