[arin-ppml] Large hole in IPv6 assignment logic

Scott Leibrand scottleibrand at gmail.com
Mon Jun 8 19:17:53 EDT 2009


I think you may be referring to the "IPv6 Multiple Discrete Networks" 
policy proposal at 

Would that proposal, if adopted, resolve your issue?  If so, it should 
be up for discussion at the fall meeting in Dearborn.


Dave Temkin wrote:
> I'm going to attempt to keep this brief, but here goes:
> Recently, I received a /48.  After beginning our rollout, I quickly 
> discovered that we'd need a /44 at the very least.  See, I have 
> multiple networks that are not interconnected by a common backbone, 
> and so a single /48 would leave me with a useless routing domain given 
> that most people prefix filter at le /48.
> Currently, each OrgID is entitled to only one /48.  Under IPv4, if you 
> operate separate, disparate networks you're allowed to request 
> multiple blocks under the Multiple Discrete Networks policy.  No such 
> policy exists for IPv6, however it's been proposed here:  
> https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six583
> I'd love to hear suggestions on workarounds until such the proposed 
> policy would be voted on and implemented. PA addressing is not a 
> viable option.
> If we expect IPv6 adoption to have a significant uptick we need to 
> take away silly barriers to addressing such as this and make address 
> assignments accessible for the common ASP or Enterprise - and right 
> now it's definitely not.
> -Dave
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list