[arin-ppml] IPv6 migration and NRPM clarification question

[Ron Grant]

"Utilization Rate" is another term that didn't really make the 
transition to IPv6 - along with "CIDR", among others.

There are huge great swaths of unused space in every IPV6 LAN I assign - 
and huge great swaths of /64 LANs that go unused in every Site 
Allocation I assign. If I put devices on one in a million IPv6 addresses 
in a LAN, i'd still have 18 quadrillion hosts....and one helluva MAC 
flood.....

A "Good Utilization" of IPv6 space might measure in the millionth of a 
percentile - how do you differentiate it from someone who's NOT using 
their space at all? When is 0.0000000001 != 0?







On 2024-08-14 1:37 p.m., A N wrote:
> I don't think it's a dumb question at all. There are too many 
> practical obstacles with getting a commitment to move to IPv6 (being 
> legally binding, what if the company shifts strategy, enforcement, 
> etc) that would preclude this as a requirement.
>
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 3:15 PM Matthew Cowen 
> <matthew at dgtlfutures.com> wrote:
>
>     HI all,
>
>     I’m often told that there are no stupid questions… to that, I say,
>     hold my beer :)
>
>     With this discussion about IPv4 allocations, the waiting list, and
>     migration to IPv6 (which, as I understand it, is still a
>     priority), has there been any proposal or discussion about
>     requiring IPv4 requesters to commit to IPv6 migration?
>
>     I’m not thinking about 4.10, which addresses facilitating
>     migration to IPv6 for those starting that process. I’m thinking
>     about something akin to the utilisation rate clause, where
>     allocations depend on actual/future promised usage. Not a
>     proposal, just a background query.
>
>     I searched the archives and haven’t found anything quite as
>     specific as that, hence my question.
>
>     One other observation. In the NRPM, it is written:
>     - 4.2.1.3. Utilization Rate
>     - 4.2.3.4.1. Utilization
>     - 4.2.4.1. Utilization Percentage (80%)
>     - 4.3.3. Utilization Rate
>     - 4.3.6.1. Utilization Requirements for Additional Assignment
>
>     4.2.1.3. is a *statement* and all the others are *requirements*.
>
>     Should these be clarified as Utilisation Rate for the statement
>     and Utilization Percentage (X %) for the requirement, or similar,
>     i.e.,
>
>     - 4.2.1.3. Utilization Rate
>     - 4.2.3.4.1. Utilization Percentage (80%)
>     - 4.2.4.1. Utilization Percentage (80%)
>     - 4.3.3. Utilization Percentage (50%)
>     - 4.3.6.1. Utilization Percentage (80%) Requirements for
>     Additional Assignment ?
>
>     Many thanks.
>
>     —
>     My best/Cordialement,
>
>     Matthew Cowen
>     dgtlfutures
>     +596 (0) 696 210 260
>     Matthew Cowen | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/matthewcowen/>
>
>     I write a little
>     <https://matthewcowen.org/categories/newsletter/> about the
>     digital world. No pressure, only if you’re interested.
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     ARIN-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:
>     https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>     Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-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:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contactinfo at arin.net  if you experience any issues.

-- 
Ron Grant
Balan Software/Networks
Network Architecture & Programming
604-737-2113

ca.linkedin.com/in/obiron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20240814/aff45c5b/attachment.htm>