[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-3: Tiny IPv6 Allocations for ISPs

[Matthew Kaufman]

On 4/4/2013 11:57 AM, David Farmer wrote:
>
> It all depends where they started using there blocks.  The current use 
> case for this policy is to reduce your holding because of the fee schedule

Doesn't this just mean that the new fee schedule is broken?

IPv6 addresses are by no means scarce... why are we treating them that 
way? If we gave someone a /32 and they aren't using all of it yet, they 
should just keep the /32.

> , but I'd prefer generic rules that allow flexibility for future 
> conditions. 

Agreed. How about "you can't give us back anything but what we gave you" 
and "we won't have stupid fee schedules that ever encourage you to want 
to do otherwise".

> Also, this is the current operational practice we have now, to allow 
> the LIR to select which /36 to retain.  If someone started using their 
> /32 in the middle why force them to renumber?
>

Why force them to give up the /32 at all? Are we running out of them or 
something?

Matthew Kaufman