[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3: IPv6 Nano-allocations

[Fernando Frediani]

On 18/04/2020 18:44, Owen DeLong wrote:
> ...
> Handing out a /48 to each end site is a core engineering design that was put into IPv6 for many valid reasons.
>
> You continue to rail against it, yet you’ve provided no reason or basis for your claim that it is “an exaggeration” or that it is in any way detrimental.
Yes /48 to a site absolutely no problem.

To a residential customers is an truly absurd. /56 or /60 is broadly 
fine for this and you can always treat the exceptions and easily give 
out a /48 to customers who justify or really have a need of it, like 
some corporate customers for instance. But not for all indistinctly.

I am trying not to go too much into this topic because I fear to to 
divert from the policy discussion. Yes, in order to discuss this we have 
to put up technical considerations and it's fine, but I guess a more 
elaborated technical discussion wouldn't be beneficial to this list.

> <clip>
> In terms of any concerns or fears about running out if we use such an address allocation policy, consider the following:
>
> 	1.	Current earth population is approximately 7,000,000,000 (7e9).
> 	2.	Let’s assume that within the lifetime of IPv6 we are somehow able to double that population to 14e9.
> 	3.	Let’s further assume that each individual resides in a solitary end site (average density is 2.3 humans per household).
> 	4.	Let’s also give each individual a separate /48 for their place of work and an additional /48 for their share of the various
> 		services and companies they communicate with as well as network infrastructure they use.
> 	5.	If we bake in all of those exaggerated assumptions, we need a total of 42e9 /48s.
> 	6.	There are 2^45 /48s in 2000::/3 (the current IETF/IANA designated IPv6 GUA pool (which can be expanded several times).
> 	7.	2^25 is 35,184,372,088,832 (more than 35e12).
> 	8.	So, in fact, without exhausting the current pool of address space, we can give every individual on earth 6 /48s and we
> 		still only consume 0.1% of 1/8th of the address space, leaving 99.9% of the current 2000::/3 still available.
I never worry about running out of IPv6 addresses. This isn't really the 
issue.
We must use them reasonably and intelligently and as mentioned above 
nowadays a /48 for a residential customer is way too much and the vast 
majority will not use even a tiny portion of it, even in a near future. 
I'd rather the technologies to develop around the usage of a for example 
a /56 which are 256 x /64 networks and still a lot for a residential 
proposes. Again, if really necessary it's not hard to give out /48 to 
someone who justify for *real needs* not for *perhaps in the future*.

Otherwise in a few years someone will start to propose to give out /32 
to residential customers because, otherwise this may limit innovation. 
Sorry I cannot agree with this reasoning.

Fernando

>
>