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

Brandon Ross bross at pobox.com
Fri Mar 29 11:37:34 EDT 2013

On Thu, 28 Mar 2013, David Farmer wrote:

> I'd change that a little and add another subsection;
>  An LIR that requested a /36 or /40 initial allocation is 
> entitled to increase said allocation's size to /36 or /32.  This change is 
> not a subsequent allocation as described in 6.5.3.  Additionally, a minimum 
> of a /32 will be reserved for all such LIRs to facilitate this expansion.

I'm good with that.

> An LIR that received a /32 initial allocation before the 
> availability of the /36 and /40 initial allocation sizes is entitled to a 
> one-time decrease of their allocation size to /36 or /40.  Such an LIR will 
> retain the first (lowest numbered) subnet or the last (highest numbered) 
> subnet of their original block.

What benefit does it give the community to limit reduction in allocation 
size to only those that were issued earlier and only once?  I am against 
that change as plenty of organizations may make initial errors in their 
allocation requests and might want to move back to a smaller size later.

Brandon Ross                                      Yahoo & AIM:  BrandonNRoss
+1-404-635-6667                                                ICQ:  2269442
Schedule a meeting:  https://doodle.com/bross            Skype:  brandonross

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list