[arin-ppml] Sensible IPv6 Allocation Policies - Rev 0.8

Jack Bates jbates at brightok.net
Tue Nov 16 16:41:12 EST 2010

On 11/16/2010 3:03 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
> I think this is a great idea. One thing that concerns me is that the fee structure is going to make it so that IPv6 done in this fashion is going to be very much more expensive. Handing out larger blocks to the same number of LIRs shouldn't have any higher cost to ARIN. If we define all allocations at nibble boundaries, then the fees should be done similarly:

This would definitely be a concern. As it is, a medium in IPv4 can 
easily find themselves as a Large in v6. What gets me is why an XX-Large 
was added.

> One other concern is how do we handle non-nibble-boundary allocations that are already out there? Allow them to be returned for a new block?

The policy change handled that, allowing for a renumber.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list