[arin-ppml] V6 address allocation policy

[Joel Jaeggli]

David Farmer wrote:
> George Bonser wrote:
> 
>> The problem is, being multihomed, nobody is going to take a /56
>> announcement for a site and while we do have our sites in the SF Bay
>> area interconnected and our policy is to announce an aggregate route, we
>> have upstream transit and peering at the individual sites and if
>> anything should happen to the backhaul between the sites we would need
>> to deaggregate the announcement.  Most will take a /48 announcement from
>> PI space, practically nobody (aside from the immediate upstream) would
>> take a /56.  We played with the notion of being able to announce a /56
>> if all sites had access to the same upstreams and having them aggregate
>> it to their peers but realized that the current "best practice" is to
>> simply announce a /48 or better.
>>
>> And we plan of expansion outside of the area that are likely going to be
>> discrete networks so again, a /48 is the only thing that is going to
>> work.
>>
>>
>>> I'm surprised they won't give you the /44.  We're working on policy to
>>> fix that.
>>> All of the IPv6 policies under consideration for the next meeting do
>>> rectify
>>> this and cause ARIN to allocate IPv6 on nibble boundaries (or more).
>>>
>>> Owen
>>
>> I suppose they can only go by their current policy guidelines and
>> apparently it is policy to allocate only what is needed for the
>> immediate foreseeable future.
> 
> After reading this and a couple other posting, within PP#107 I want to
> make explicit that multiple sites are a justification for larger than a
> /48.
> 
> However, I think some kind of qualification of multiple sites is
> necessary. I think two offices across town from each other with 10 host
> each and that share a common connection to the Internet probably
> shouldn't qualify for two /48s.  I'm thinking of language something like
> this;
> 
> "To qualify as a separate sites, locations must either be in separate
> cities and/or metropolitan areas, or if within the same city or
> metropolitan area to be considered separate sites each site must have
> independent connection to the Internet."

Two or more Data Centers, Campuses, factories or branch offices in the
same metro may well require  additional prefixes. They may be seperate
by design, or separable at some later date, separable for DR purposes,
discrete based on function, etc.

> So if you had two sites in different metro areas or two sites in the
> same metro area but each has a separate connection to the Internet then
> two /48s are justified.
> 
> Is that reasonable?
>