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

[William Herrin]

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/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20170523/10a23db1/attachment.htm>