[arin-ppml] IPv6 End-User Initial Assignment Policy (or: Please don't me make do ULA + NAT66)
hvgeekwtrvl at gmail.com
Wed Feb 18 17:47:15 EST 2015
So we argue for a /48 for each home user site but we toss out that
argument when it comes to a smaller business with multiple sites?
I applaud the intent but think it is too short sighted William. It
should take no more routing slots for an aggregated /40 or /44 than
for a /48 and the /40 or /44 are in line with the v6 paradigm that has
been fronted on this list and others.
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:28 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:59 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> I think that for now any end user willing to pay ARIN's fee
>> should qualify for a /48 regardless of any technical criteria.
> This got me thinking. Who would choke on a policy proposal which
> looked like the following?
> Add to section 18.104.22.168:
> (f) All end user organizations who do not qualify for addresses under
> (a) through (e) qualify for a direct assignment of exactly one /48.
> This section (f) shall expire upon determination by ARIN staff that
> IPv6 has become the "dominant" network protocol on the public
> Internet. The expiry shall not impact prior assignments made under
> this section.
> Bill Herrin
> William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
> Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
> 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:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML