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

[Joel Jaeggli]

Davis, Terry L wrote:
> Milton
> 
> Agreed a /56 might be appropriate.
> 
> Earlier Owen appropriately corrected me for comparing a /48 v6
> allocation to a class B v4 allocation but he actually enforced the
> point I was going to make.  Even a /48 allocation for small business
> or individual use is a bit ridiculous given conventional IP network
> architectures.  But one of our problems is that since we don't have
> any truly large scale deployments (something at least into the 100K
> nodes size), we don't know what a real IPv6 network may consume.

Because you have not experienced one, does not mean that they do not exist.

With something like 10 years operational experience behind us we do not
have to treat a /48 assignment per end site as though it were
"ridiculous", it is not. you can to assign residential customers
something longer, fine, be aware they'll need more than a /64. It's
pretty easy (just as it is in v4) to use 16 bits at a large site for the
purposes of hierachical assignment, supernetting and so on.

The fact of the matter is we've lived with scarcity so long it's
considered normal. Scarcity results expensive and undesirable behavior.
We don't have the play that game (with v6) anymore and we shouldn't make
our customers do it either.

> Take care Terry
> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net
>> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller 
>> Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2009 2:49 PM To: Scott Leibrand; William
>> Herrin Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] A modest
>> proposal for IPv6 address allocations
>> 
>> 
>>> -----Original Message----- Not sure about all the details, but I
>>> like the fact that we'd be able to do away with the ISP/end-user
>>> distinction, make it easy to get a /48, and provide a simple
>>> growth path for the most common cases...
>>> 
>>> -Scott
>> Ditto.
>> 
>> But, let me express (uncharacteristically) some concern about
>> overly liberal initial allocations. (e.g., why not a /56?) From the
>> standpoint of developing countries, there is some legitimate
>> concern about reproducing the land rush phase of IPv4 address
>> allocations (oops, there goes 1/3 of the space....) 
>> _______________________________________________ PPML You are
>> receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
>> Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). Unsubscribe or
>> manage your mailing list subscription at: 
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact
>> info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> _______________________________________________ PPML You are
> receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public
> Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your
> mailing list subscription at: 
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact
> info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>