[130971] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Definitive Guide to IPv6 adoption - Sparse IPv6 allocation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Oct 18 17:01:13 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
To: Randy Carpenter <rcarpen@network1.net>
In-Reply-To: <1790150026.11324.1287430937213.JavaMail.root@zimbra.network1.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2010 13:54:37 -0700
Cc: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>,
North American Network Operators Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Generally the older allocations would be left in place until deprecated =
by attrition.
At least that's what I plan to advocate in my policy proposal.
Owen
Sent from my iPad
On Oct 18, 2010, at 12:42 PM, Randy Carpenter <rcarpen@network1.net> =
wrote:
>=20
> I have a few customers whose allocations are /29 away from their =
nearest neighbor (half a nibble). That seems a little close considering =
there is a lot of talk about doing nibble boundaries, and there doesn't =
seem to be consensus yet.
>=20
> For these customers, I don't think they will need more than a /29, but =
if we collectively decide that a /28 is the next step from a /32, how =
will the older allocations be dealt with? This is pretty much a =
rhetorical question at this point, and I suppose the proper thing to do =
is to channel these questions toward the PPML for discussion as =
potential policy.
>=20
> thanks,
> -Randy
>=20
> --
> | Randy Carpenter
> | Vice President, IT Services
> | Red Hat Certified Engineer
> | First Network Group, Inc.
> | (419)739-9240, x1
> ----
>=20
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Randy -
>>=20
>> We'll likely put that out to the ARIN community for consultation
>> at the point in time when becomes a potential issue. I expect we
>> will have plenty of time before that needs to be considered at the
>> present rate of allocation.
>>=20
>> /John
>>=20
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> ARIN
>>=20
>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 3:08 PM, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>>=20
>>> John,
>>>=20
>>> Can you tell us at what degree the bisection stops? i.e. does it
>>> keep going until there are no spaces left, or will you leave some
>>> space in between each one to leave some room for future needs for
>>> orgs that already have allocations?
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> -Randy
>>>=20
>>> --
>>> | Randy Carpenter
>>> | Vice President, IT Services
>>> | Red Hat Certified Engineer
>>> | First Network Group, Inc.
>>> | (419)739-9240, x1
>>> ----
>>>=20
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 2:18 PM, David Conrad wrote:
>>>>> On Oct 18, 2010, at 6:59 AM, Jack Bates wrote:
>>>>>> ARIN does reservations (unsure at what length, but at least down
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> /31).
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Do they still do that? Back when I was at IANA, one of the
>>>>> justifications the RIRs gave for the /12s they received was that
>>>>> they were going to be using the 'bisection' method of allocation
>>>>> which removes the need for reservation. Last I heard, APNIC was
>>>>> using the bisection method...
>>>>=20
>>>> ARIN is doing the same (the 'bisection' method) with our IPv6
>>>> management
>>>> since January 2010: we refer to the "sparse allocation" approach
>>>> and
>>>> it
>>>> was requested by the community during the ARIN/NANOG Dearborn
>>>> meeting.
>>>>=20
>>>> FYI,
>>>> /John
>>>>=20
>>>> John Curran
>>>> President and CEO
>>>> ARIN
