[arin-ppml] A modest proposal for IPv6 address allocations

[Owen DeLong]

On May 30, 2009, at 10:19 PM, James Hess wrote:

> Why allocate  /32s  from a pool reserved for  /32s?
> It would perhaps make more sense, as a matter of policy, that a
> special allocation strategy be utilized,  that the  /48s,  /32s, and
> /24s  are allocated from just one pool.
>
> And that they be allocated in a manner  that maximizes the duration
> during which the 2nd/3rd allocation request would be contiguous with
> the earlier allocation.
>
>
> e.g.  A  /48  may be allocated,  but the  entire  /24 could be left
> "internally" reserved for as long as possible.
>
> So if/when a  recipient of  a  /48 allocation requests their next
> allocation, it would be preferred that the /32  will be a block that
> begins with, and contains the same address space as their /48,  in
> addition to the added space.
>
> And if a third allocation is requested, the /24 also,  would be chosen
> so as to overlap with and contain the /32.
>
>
> This has the benefit that they don't need a second advertisement, and
> never have a need to return addresses.
>
>
>
> If/when ARIN's  allocations of V6 space ever becomes so dense  that
> reserving the entire  /24  in advance  for recipients of /48s is no
> longer feasible,    it  should be the oldest-assigned  /48   that are
> first "blocked" from expanding contiguously to a /24,  followed by the
> oldest  /32 allocations.
>
This strategy presumes that ARIN is dividing the entire IPv6 address  
space
and not receiving things in /24 chunks from IANA.

Owen