[arin-ppml] V6 address allocation policy

[William Herrin]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 8:50 AM, James Hess <mysidia at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 3:28 AM,  <michael.dillon at bt.com> wrote:
>> It is common for companies with several sites to have them all connected
>> to the Internet via a gateway at a central site. Nevertheless, it would
>> be ridiculous for ARIN to treat this a single site.
>
> It's not that ridiculous.
> It is probably more ridiculous to suggest that each of   one  end user
> network's  physical locations  really needs an  additional   /48
>
> I  believe  /48  is  selected  on the assumption that  all the  end
> user's  subnets  would be taken from their  one /48.
>
> If  each physical location receives its own allocation, then there's
> really  no reason to  pick /48  over /56.      A large number of
> subnets at a single physical location is quite rare.

Or to put a different spin on it:

IPv6's routing and addressing architecture is directly sensitive to:

LAN count (hard)
Multihoming (hard)
Administrative system boundaries (moderate)
Renumbering (soft)

It is not directly sensitive to:

Host count
Physical location
Many many other factors important to various SIGs.

That's why Multiple Distinct Networks (administrative boundary) is an
important difference that merits additional /48's while multiple POPs
(physical location) is not.

Regards,
Bill Herrin



-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004