[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Equalization of Assignment Registration requirements between IPv4 and IPv6

[hostmaster at uneedus.com]

As the author of this Draft Policy, I can now see the IPv4 change has 
little/no support.  I included it originally to give equality to both v4 
and v6 with more than 16 ip4 addresses or 16 ip6 networks.

I have asked the AC to remove the IPv4 language from the proposal 
(4.2.3.7.1), leaving only the IPv6 portion (6.5.5.1).  After their next 
meeting, the v4 portion will be hopefully gone.

Since v6 assignments should be on nibble boundaries, the only real choices 
are /48, /52, /56, /60 and /64. So far, based on expressed comments, "more 
than a /56" appears to have the majority of support.

Does the community think I should also ask the AC to change the 6.5.5.1 v6 
proposal to /56 to match the expressed preference so far so that the Draft 
is in alignment with the community?

Albert Erdmann
Network Administrator
Paradise On Line Inc.



On Thu, 1 Jun 2017, Austin Murkland wrote:

> Oppose as written, agree with all of Andy's points.
>
> -Austin
>
> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Hadenfeldt, Andrew C <
> Andrew.C.Hadenfeldt at windstream.com> wrote:
>
>> Oppose as written, +1 on the points below (leave /29 alone, and would
>> prefer to see /56 rather than /60)
>>
>>
>>
>> *-Andy*
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ARIN-PPML [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] *On Behalf Of *William
>> Herrin
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 23, 2017 2:02 PM
>> *To:* ARIN <info at arin.net>
>> *Cc:* arin-ppml at arin.net
>> *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Equalization of
>> Assignment Registration requirements between IPv4 and IPv6
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 2:35 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>>
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Equalization of Assignment Registration
>> requirements between IPv4 and IPv6
>>
>> Policy statement:
>>
>> Amend 4.2.3.7.1 of the policy manual to strike "/29 or more" and change to
>> "more than a /28".
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> In my opinion...
>>
>>
>>
>> Leave /29 alone or change it to "more than a single IP address." In these
>> days of IPv4 shortage, substantial networks sit behind small blocks of
>> public addresses. These networks should be documented with reachable POCs
>> lest the anti-spam/virus/malware folks slam down /24 filters for lack of
>> information about how misbehaving networks are partitioned.
>>
>>
>>
>> Amend 6.5.5.1 of the policy manual to strike "/64 or more" and change to
>> "more than a /60".
>>
>>
>>
>> Change this to "more than a /56." Service providers should NOT be
>> assigning /64's to end users. If you're doing that, you're doing it wrong.
>> An IPv6 customer should be able to have more than one /64 subnet without
>> resorting to NAT so /60 should be the absolute minimum end-user assignment,
>> equivalent for all intents and purposes to an IPv4 /32. If we then want
>> "equivalence" to the /29 policy so that individuals with the minimum and
>> near-minimum assignment do not need to be SWIPed, it makes sense to move
>> the next subnetting level up. In IPv6, assignment is strongly recommended
>> on nibble boundaries, so that means /56.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Bill Herrin
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
>> Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
>> This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the
>> intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
>> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
>> contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original
>> message and any attachments.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
>>
>