[125043] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Thu Apr 8 15:35:30 2010
From: David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>
In-Reply-To: <4BBE24CC.2050803@unfix.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 09:33:44 -1000
To: Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:47 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
> [changing topics, so that it actually reflects the content]
>=20
> On 2010-04-08 20:33, William Herrin wrote:
>> You're aware that RIPE has already made some /19 and /20 IPv6 =
allocations?
>>=20
>> Yes, with suitably questionable delegations, it is possible to run =
out
>> of IPv6 quickly.
>=20
> Ever noticed that fat /13 for a certain military network in the ARIN =
region!?
I think that was William's point.
> At least those /19 are justifyiable under the HD rules (XX million =
customers times a /48 and voila). A /13 though, very hard to justify...
Both are questionable, it's just a matter of degree. =20
> Also, please note that the current policies and "waste" (ahem) is only
> for 2000::/3, if that runs out we can take another 7 looks at how we
> should distribute address space without "waste".
Unfortunately, since address allocation policy is subject to the whims =
of the public policy definition process there is a risk (e.g., the =
proposal to allocate /24s of IPv6 if you knew the magic word or the =
proposals out of the ITU to allocate country blocks (/8s have been =
mentioned)). There is no finite resource that people can't waste.
Regards,
-drc
