[arin-ppml] Sensible IPv6 Allocation Policies - Rev 0.8 (PP 121)
jbates at brightok.net
Thu Nov 18 14:50:27 EST 2010
I strongly support (in case I wasn't clear previously).
On 11/18/2010 1:15 PM, lar at mwtcorp.net wrote:
> While a /32 at first glance looked like way more addresses than we needed,
> when I started engineering the network into my locations it quickly
> became clear that /48 was out for all but my largest business
> customers. /56 or /60's are all I could manage for SOHO and residential
> and still have a reasonably manageable network.
We had the same problem. While you can do a do-over and get larger than
/32 easy enough now, there are many other gaping holes in the existing
policy. I believe that this policy does well to try and keep ARIN from
having to create interpretations (policy doesn't really state, so we
don't do it).
More information about the ARIN-PPML