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

[Seth Mattinen]

On 3/27/13 6:34 PM, David Farmer wrote:
> On 3/27/13 19:40 , Jimmy Hess wrote:
>> On 3/27/13, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>>> On Mar 27, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>>    How many customers does an typical xx-small ISP have today?
>>>    (xx-small being those ISPs who hold a /22 of IPv4 space)
>>
>> Well, logically they could have up to  approximately1000 customers,
>> assuming no NAT
>> and an average of one /32 per customer.
>>
>> The IPv6 equivalent of  1000 /48s     =     a  /38
> 
> Well technically 1024, but with an 80% rule that is 819 customers.
> However, with a residential ISP using customer pools and lets say one
> pool of /22 then 512 customers could justify more IPv4, I think.  But
> with /29 pools you would justify more address space with 80% of the /29
> pools allocated or 103; and 50% or more usage in all pools, or 4
> addresses; So that could be as little as 103 * 4 = 412 residential
> customers.  So the CPE for those residential customers are going to
> request what size blocks using DHCPv6-PD, probably /64s mostly today,
> but some might request /56s and hopefully some will request /48s.
> Obviously a /40 wouldn't provide enough /48s, but I'm not sure /48s are
> realistic.
> 
> While on the other had, you would only need 103 /29 business customers
> to justify more IPv4 space.  And a /40 provides more than enough /48s to
> cover this business customer scenario.
> 
> So /40 isn't perfect, but it seems reasonable and would allow a business
> case to be built before IPv6 is likely to be the cause of a change in
> fee category.
> 
> That's my run of the numbers.
> 


One really nice thing about the IPv6 /32 /48 /56 /64 system is no arcane
math exercises. But who really needs simplicity.

~Seth