[arin-ppml] Large hole in IPv6 assignment logic

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Mon Jun 8 20:25:46 EDT 2009

I believe that situation is exactly what proposal 84 is intended to  

Unfortunately, I do not have a good answer for you under current policy.

I would urge you to review proposal 84, and, if you feel this  
addresses your
needs, be vocal in your support for it to become policy.


On Jun 8, 2009, at 3:48 PM, 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