[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2012-2: IPv6 Subsequent Allocations Utilization Requirement

[William Herrin]

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 4:09 PM, Heather Schiller
<heather.skanks at gmail.com> wrote:
> I am working on final text and prepping slides for the meeting in a
> few weeks.  Does anyone have any feedback on this policy or on the
> staff feedback?

Hi Heather,

On the one hand, I'm in favor of a pro-forma approval of an ISP's
second IPv6 request so long as it is not outrageously sized (for
"outrage" in the bigger than /24 category). Time enough to make tight
IPv6 allocation rules when we have the experience which goes with half
of the packets on the Internet moving with IPv6.

On the other hand, the text as written seems contrived. The following
subnetting scheme appears to qualify:

Original /32 allocation:

/33 to Minneapolis POP
1 customer /48
/34 to Saint Paul POP
1 customer /48
3 ISP corporate LANs, /48 each

Woohoo, 75.0046% utilization! Block #2, here I come.

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