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

[William Herrin]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 8:09 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> On Mar 27, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>
>> Further, the fact that it will is detrimental to good IPv6 deployment
>> and we should, therefore, correct the errors in the fee structure rather
>> than create incentives to create end-user address poverty in IPv6.
>
>   How many customers does an typical xx-small ISP have today?
>   (xx-small being those ISPs who hold a /22 of IPv4 space)
>
>   Based on that, how much IPv6 space are they likely to need
>   (using reasonable management practices), and then presumingly
>   we add a very large safety factor, what would the resulting
>   IPv6 allocation be?

Hi John,

/32, just as the IETF recommends. Given sound technical reasons to
diverge from the IETF's suggestion, I'll lead the charge. But what
sound technical reason do we have for discouraging ISPs, any ISPs of
any size, from starting with at least a /32?

Instead, we intentionally want to avoid slow-starting ISPs with too
few IPv6 addresses as we allude to in NRPM 6.3.4 and 6.3.8.

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