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

David Farmer farmer at umn.edu
Fri Mar 29 16:03:15 EDT 2013

On 3/29/13 14:34 , John Curran wrote:
> On Mar 29, 2013, at 3:10 PM, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
>> Yes, probably. I added the last sentence to make it abundantly clear, that is the intended effect of the first sentence.  If John and staff interpret the first sentence as requiring ARIN to reserve a /32 for anyone with a x-small or xx-small IPv6 allocation, then I would be happy to remove the last sentence.  But, if there is anyway to interpret the first sentence as not requiring the a hard reservation of a /32 then I think I'd prefer to leave the sentence in.
> Unless otherwise directed by policy, IPv6 /36 allocations shall be from a reserved /32 and /40 would be from a reserved /36 (just as /32's come from /28 reserved blocks)


That tells me if our policy intent is to have both /36 and /40 
allocations for LIRs to be made from a /32 reserved block then we need 
to explicitly state that in the policy and the last sentence is necessary.

Any objection to it staying in the policy statement?


David Farmer               Email: farmer at umn.edu
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE     Phone: 1-612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029  Cell: 1-612-812-9952

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list