[125072] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "Running out of IPv6" (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu Apr 8 17:03:54 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <t2i443de7ad1004081210sb5af0480v760df5892783f248@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:54:38 -0700
To: Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>, Joe Greco <jgreco@ns.sol.net>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Apr 8, 2010, at 12:10 PM, Chris Grundemann wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 12:47, Jeroen Massar <jeroen@unfix.org> wrote:
>> [changing topics, so that it actually reflects the content]
>>
>> On 2010-04-08 20:33, William Herrin wrote:
>>> Yes, with suitably questionable delegations, it is possible to run out
>>> of IPv6 quickly.
>
> The bottom line (IMHO) is that IPv6 is NOT infinite and propagating
> that myth will lead to waste. That being said, the IPv6 space is MUCH
> larger than IPv4. Somewhere between 16 million and 17 billion times
> larger based on current standards by my math[1].
>
Agreed
>> Ever noticed that fat /13 for a certain military network in the ARIN
>> region!?
>>
>> 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...
>
> Not every customer needs a /48. In fact most probably don't.
>
Whether they need it or not, it is common allocation/assignment
practice. I agree that smaller (SOHO, for example) customers should
get a /56 by default and a /48 on request, but, this is by no means
a universal truth of current practice.
Owen
