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

David Farmer farmer at umn.edu
Tue Jun 6 15:43:26 EDT 2017

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 1:30 PM, Leif Sawyer <lsawyer at gci.com> wrote:

> The boundaries at /60, /56, and /48  have all been discussed.  If one is
> more favorable than
> the other, and you would like to see the proposal edited to use that one,
> we will certainly
> take that under advisory.

Personally, I find any of the three acceptable. I have a preference that
"assignments longer than /56 not require SWIP", and "assignments /48 or
shorter require SWIP".

While minimally acceptable, I would prefer to not create an incentive for
providers to make assignments as long as /60. I would prefer providers to
make assignments no longer than /56, therefore I believe assignments of /56
and longer should not require SWIP. Since assignments /48 and shorter could
find their way into the DFZ, therefore I believe they should require SWIP
for operational reasons.

In between /56 and /48 I'm mostly agnostic.  But, I suppose we could go
with "/52 or shorter" that way there isn't any confusion, that /56 does not
require SWIP and /48 does require SWIP.

Hope that helps.

David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20170606/0f6b6a36/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list