[arin-ppml] IPv6 Allocation Planning

George, Wes E [NTK] Wesley.E.George at sprint.com
Tue Aug 10 09:21:22 EDT 2010

As a representative of a company that successfully justified an ARIN IPv6 allocation larger than /32 several years ago, I would pose this question - what problem with the current justification/allocation process are you trying to solve with this? Are you just trying to reduce the instances where people would have to go back to the well for more (possibly non-contiguous) blocks because they either weren't forward thinking enough or good enough at spinning a believable story to justify a bigger chunk of address space? Or am I missing something else? I am not sure I follow your assertion about aggregation benefits, so I think your rationale would have to be more specific about how that might work, perhaps as others have said with more stringent requirements around block allocation and aggregation.
Also, how do you see this interacting with something like 2010-12 and 2010-9?

Wes George

-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong
Sent: Friday, August 06, 2010 3:38 PM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net List
Subject: [arin-ppml] IPv6 Allocation Planning

In thinking about address planning and deployment, I've been doing some various

It seems to me that we have more than enough addresses to use the following methodology
without any concern for exhaustion or shortage for a very long time. It also seems to me that
the advantages in terms of human factors and network planning simplicity are large enough
to be worthy of consideration.




This e-mail may contain Sprint Nextel proprietary information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list