[arin-ppml] The non-deployment of IPv6

michael.dillon at bt.com michael.dillon at bt.com
Sat Dec 12 18:49:47 EST 2009

> Although I'm not in a position to request PI space, where I 
> had a hard time was informing ARIN that a /32 was too much 
> for my needs (and I _still_ received it, due to policy).

That /32 may have been too much for YOUR needs, but you are
not the only one whose needs are analysed. In particular, the
global community of network operators also has needs, and those
needs are better served by giving you a /32 even if, on the 
surface of it, the allocation appears too big.

1. We can afford to give every operator a /32, not matter
how small.

2. By giving everyone a /32 and encouraging them to announce
a single prefix, we reduce the profile of a single network
operator to a single entry in the global routing table. There
are exceptions of course but that is by far the most common

3. If we gave smaller operators longer prefixes, many of them
would come back for additional, non-aggregatable allocations
as their business grew. By giving out the /32 to everyone, we
minimize the impact on the global routing table of many 
extra non-aggregatable allocations.

--Michael Dillon

P.S. You cannot understand IPv6 piecemeal or by comparing
IPv4 things to the IPv6 equivalent, because there often is
no equivalent in IPv6. Twisting the meaning of things in
IPv6 to conform to an IPv4 world view just leads to confusion.
Try to understand IPv6 as a holistic system of networking
that has a family resemblance to its ancestor, but also 
incorporates new genetic material.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list