[arin-ppml] Sensible IPv6 Allocation Policies - Rev 0.8 (PP 121)

[Owen DeLong]

On Nov 17, 2010, at 2:10 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

> On 11/17/2010 1:30 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> Ignoring the personal attacks, I've answered Ted at length in private email.
>> 
> 
> Owen has indeed responded to the DFZ issue to me via private e-mail.  It is a logical, concrete response that really has nothing at all with the items listed here.  I wish that he would have included it in his response here.
> 
> Ted
> 
>> 

I consider it pretty well related, but, at Ted's request, I will saddle
you all with that piece of my response to him:

>>> By increasing the maximum amount of space allowed (possibly dramatically),
>>> if anything, this should reduce the impact on the DFZ.
>>> 
>> 
>> And the logical reason for this is....
>> 
> Because it will reduce the number of organizations that come, get a /32, discover
> that isn't enough, come back, get a /31, fill that up, come back, get a /30... Which
> is one of two possible outcomes of current policy. The other possible outcome
> is that LIRs will be assigning end sites blocks smaller than /48 in order to have
> the ability to support more than ~60,000 customers which, while not harmful
> to the DFZ is harmful to innovation on the internet in general.
> 
> We have already seen this harmful behavior in Europe (Free.fr is giving
> customers /60s), Asia (many ISPs are squeezing their customers into
> prefixes of /56 and /64 in order to squeeze their entire networks into
> a /32), and North America (several IPv6 trials have involved prefix sizes
> ranging from /52 to /60).



Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20101117/b0b09c70/attachment.htm>