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

Paul Vixie vixie at isc.org
Sat May 30 20:46:25 EDT 2009

gdolley at arpnetworks.com (Garry Dolley) writes:

> While I like the effort to simplify the current policy, I don't
> think this would actually work in practice.  To see why, I'd like to
> point out the following:
>   1. RFC 3177, "IAB/IESG Recommendations on IPv6 Address Allocations to
>   Sites" http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3177
>   2. RFC 5375, "IPv6 Unicast Address Assignment Considerations"
>      http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5375
> Everyone who is participating in these policy debates should read these.


> Basically, for organizations who are assigning IPv6 space to other
> organizations, and aggregating that space to their upstreams, really
> do need a /32 to begin with.  This is because all their downstream
> assignments will be /48's (RFC 3177).

Not so fast.

> If they were only allowed to get a /48 to begin with, they couldn't
> assign any further /48's.

Not everything that IETF has written about address allocation has worked
out in practice.  (For example, classful addressing, or experimental or
multicast addressing.)  It's reasonable for the RIR's to evaluate the
"ground truth" when composing our allocation policies, even though it's
also quite important to read everything the IETF has to say on the topic.
Paul Vixie

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list