[arin-ppml] Fwd: Advisory Council Meeting Results - December 2019

hostmaster at uneedus.com hostmaster at uneedus.com
Sat Jan 4 15:41:07 EST 2020

I understand that there might have been some poor choices made with IPv6 
in regard to address allocation that might lead to a future exhaust.  The 
main one is the 64 bit network and 64 bit host decision, considering that 
it was based on 48 bit ethernet OUI's. I think it should have been 80 bits 
of network and 48 bits of host instead.  Even in the largest of networks, 
48 bits is clearly overkill.  Having the current /64 is clearly excessive.

Other decisions like giving every node a /48 also add to the greater 
possibility of exhaust at some future time. Many players have already 
decided to assign less than a /48 to their customers by default.

However, unlike the situation of IPv4, there is still plenty of time to 
correct this.  Currently only 1/16 of the address space is currently used 
for global addresses.  When it comes time to assign the next 1/16 of 
space, we could always tighten up the standards, leading to vastly more 
addresses being available per 1/16 block. Adoption of an 80/48 split by 
existing players would vastly expand their holdings.  Also, adoption of 
only providing a /48 upon request and defaulting to /56 or /60 can also 
vastly expand holdings as well.

We still have plenty of time while only 1/16 of the address space is being 
used to address being more conservative in the future.

Does anyone know what is the utilization rate of 2000::/3 is or where this 
data is being tracked?

Albert Erdmann
Network Administrator
Paradise On Line Inc.

On Sat, 4 Jan 2020, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:

> In message <alpine.LRH.2.21.2001031911040.742 at bigone.uneedus.com>,
> hostmaster at uneedus.com wrote:
>> [IPv6] also brings RIR's
>> back to their original record keeping role, without having to police the
>> number of addresses that a member needs.
> I am not persuaded that this will be the case.  When IPv4 was first
> promulgated, I do believe that just about everyone felt that there
> was no way in hell that "the Internet" such as it was, or such as it
> might become, could ever use up 4 billion addresses.  Now admittedly,
> things -are- rather different with IPv6, where the number of addreses
> is a lot closer to the number of elementary particles in the Universe,
> but I do think it is unwise to ever assume that there are any practical
> limits on man's ability and/or willingness to waste stuff.  In other
> words, I think that some amount of thoughtful husbandry of the resource
> will always be needed.
> Regards,
> rfg
> _______________________________________________
> 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:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list