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

Seth Mattinen sethm at rollernet.us
Fri Apr 5 12:37:13 EDT 2013

On 4/5/13 9:31 AM, David Farmer wrote:
> On 4/5/13 11:24 , Seth Mattinen wrote:
>> On 4/4/13 3:53 PM, David Farmer wrote:
>>> If the lower ones go a way then, as was said no one in their right mind
>>> would choose /36 or /40.  I can't imagine anything smaller, I just don't
>>> see room for more changes one the smaller side.  At least without
>>> changing the IPv6 architecture and the /64 subnet standard, and that
>>> would be a big enough change that a whole bunch of assumptions need to
>>> change not just this one.
>> I would want to see verbiage in the policy that would immediately
>> revoke/revert it if any fee schedule changes are made. If we're going to
>> start making policy based on the fees then we should have to rerun them
>> through the them the PDP anytime the fees they are based on change.
> I'm not going to include that right now but I will raise that question
> at the Barbados meeting.

I see no reason to have a policy motivated strictly by fees to remain 
after fee changes that may or may not negate it, and to determine that 
it should go back through the PDP. Otherwise we're just cluttering the 
NRPM with irrelevant policy.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list