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

William Herrin bill at herrin.us
Fri Mar 29 17:31:17 EDT 2013

On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 4:12 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>    Can you explain why it is desirable
>    to allocate /40's from a reserved /32?
>     Should /36's be from a /28 as well?
>     (Or should all of them be from reserved /28's?)

Hi John,

The idea is that an ISP receiving less than a /32 should *always* be
able to expand to a /32 without either renumbering or adding a
additional route to the public Internet. The loss of the balance of
that /32 is far preferable to either the challenge of renumbering or
the registry-driven addition of another BGP route.

>From another perspective: the ISP should receive a minimum allocation
of /32. ARIN may withhold part of it in order to fairly bill the ISP
less, but the /32 should always be there, allocated for the ISP
whenever he's ready to pay for it.

So ideally, whatever practice ARIN follows for allocating ISP /32's,
it should follow the *identical* practice for allocating ISP /36's and

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

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list