[arin-ppml] IPv6 End-User Initial Assignment Policy (or: Please don't me make do ULA + NAT66)

[Gary T. Giesen]

Bill,

Am I to assume then that you disagree with the provisions in NRPM 6.5.8.1 c.
and d. then?

GTG

-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
Behalf Of William Herrin
Sent: February 18, 2015 11:44 AM
To: Gary T. Giesen
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv6 End-User Initial Assignment Policy (or: Please
don't me make do ULA + NAT66)

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Gary T. Giesen <ggiesen at giesen.me> wrote:
> Imagine a scenario where a company has 10 VPN tunnels to suppliers, 
> partners, etc. Imagine it takes 2 months per tunnel to renumber by the 
> time you've gone through the change control process on both sides, 
> etc. That could be nearly two years of fairly concerted effort, and 
> none of those are at all unrealistic numbers.

Hi Gary,

Renumbering is HARD. Renumbering is EXPENSIVE. Few fools still claim
otherwise.

On the other hand routing slots are also expensive and fairly distributing
the $10k/year systemic cost guesstimate of an IPv6 routing slot to the 40k
or so organizations who are collectively compelled to spend it has proven to
be an intractable problem. I worked up a BGP cost estimate half a decade
ago; the numbers are out of date but you may still find it informative.

The renumbering cost is not a good enough reason to increase the IPv6 table
size. This is pointed out in NRPM 6.3.8: "In IPv6 address policy, the goal
of aggregation is considered to be the most important." This means
aggregation with your ISP's address space where technically feasible.

Frankly, the solution to your problem is: buy a second ISP link at your core
site that the other sites aggregate to. Even if it's just a backup link
based on commodity DSL, cable or satellite plus a tunnel out to a data
center-located BGP speaker.

Having multihomed, aggregation with your ISP is no longer technically
feasible. This has been proven over and over again. That's why it's one of
the criteria that establishes justification for IPv6 direct assignments.
Multihoming eliminates your business risk for not being able to get IPv6
addresses. And such a simple backup link is for sure less expensive than the
renumbering cost.

And as an added bonus it makes your network more reliable. ;)

Regards,
Bill Herrin




--
William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us Owner,
Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public
Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.