[arin-ppml] A modest proposal for IPv6 address allocations
Joe Maimon
jmaimon at chl.com
Sun May 31 20:49:21 EDT 2009
William Herrin wrote:
> So here's a crazy plan:
>
> A. The first IPv6 allocation from ARIN is always a /48. To justify it,
> you need to be multihomed. There are no other qualifications. The /48
> will be allocated from a pool from which only /48's are allocated.
>
> B. The second IPv6 allocation from ARIN is always a /32. To justify it
> you need to demonstrate that you've efficiently used the /48 for some
> reasonable definition of efficient, that you've implemented SWIP or
> RWHOIS for your downstream assignments and that you will run out of
> space in the /48 within one year. The /32 will be allocated from a
> pool reserved for allocating /32's.
>
> C. The third IPv6 allocation from ARIN is always a /24. To justify it
Renumbering is something everyone should desire to avoid, regardless of
how easy it is, and I would oppose any policy promoting that activity,
so please clarify whether you were intending for renumbering to occur or
not.
The only sane method for general prefix filtering is per prefix size per
identifiable pool.
And there should be only a few of these pools.
So please put a nail into the mantra of registries not being involved in
routing. It becomes rocket science and/or mind numbing effort to the
point of impossibility to try to prefix filter the internet without some
sort of clear guidelines and easy to follow heuristics. And they need to
stop changing with the seasons.
I suppose secured bgp will fix all that. I bet registries will have even
more to do with routing under that system. Put it to bed. Its good
philosophy but bad practice.
All effort should be made to limit the prefixes an ASN has to advertise
for all its needs. That means to me erring on the side of large and
sparse allocation techniques.
Joe
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list