[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2024-8: Restrict the Largest Initial IPv6 Allocation to /20

[William Herrin]

On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 2:16 PM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 26, 2024, at 06:55, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> > Folks seeking a /16 are doing it with paperwork tigers.
>
> Are there “folks seeking a /16”?

I know of no imminent plague of unreasonable IPv6 requests. But if one
organization will do it then two will and if two will then it's hard
to say where it'll stop.

What I don't want is for us to see these unreasonable allocations and
decide we need to tighten the criteria and make the paperwork more of
a hassle. I'd rather set the cap lower and if someone wants to pay the
cost of being in the top category under the cap then so be it.

Implicit in my argument is, of course, that the /16 allocation ARIN
made was unreasonable, the product of a paperwork tiger divorced from
genuine use. Convince me I'm wrong if you can.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


--
William Herrin
bill at herrin.us
https://bill.herrin.us/