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

[Owen DeLong]

I would argue that the number of POPs and the number of customers per POP in the largest $CABLECO in the US probably warrants a /16 even though they have not received one.

If they had properly applied for one, they might not be in the current unfortunate situation where their residential customers can’t get more than a /60 from them.

YMMV.

Owen


> On Jun 27, 2024, at 15:04, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 2:46 PM David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
>> As I said, the current policy seems to be functioning as intended.
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> I can't prove a negative, so let me turn the question around on you:
> we know a /16 has been allocated. We can't know how they justified it
> because that information is private. Can you produce a -notional-
> justification for a /16 that we all agree is -reasonable-? If you
> cannot, then what purpose is served by allowing such consumptive
> registrations?
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> William Herrin
> bill at herrin.us
> https://bill.herrin.us/
> _______________________________________________
> 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.