> On Jul 14, 2017, at 14:57 , David Farmer <[email protected]> wrote: > > Rather than base it on the criteria of business vs. residential customer, how > about simply basing it on the criteria, is the assignment intended to be or > is used within the global routing system or not, or if the customer requests > their assignment be SWIPed. Most residential assignments be they /56 or /48 > won't be in the global routing system, neither will many business assignments > either, after that then an assignment is only SWIPed if the customer requests > it.
I’d be fine with that, but I’ll point out it’s a much more complicated policy to express vs. the simple definition in section 2 that already exists for residential. As you stated, both mechanisms largely capture the same set of assignments. > My reasoning for wanting to have /48s SWIPed isn't based on business vs > residential customer type, which has a fuzzy definition sometimes anyway. > Its that /48s might appear in the routing table. So just make that the > criteria in the first place, if we are not going to based it on a specific > size like we did in IPv4. Also, then any policy violations become easily > apparent. If an ISP doesn't SWIP some of there business customers, how are > you going to know anyway? However, if a route is in the route table and > there is no SWIP that is fairly self apparent. I’d argue that most /48s that are likely to be SWIP’d are unlikely to appear in the GRT because most of them are PA and people that want to advertise their own /48 are more likely to just pony up the $100/year to ARIN rather than get stuck in PA renumbering hell when they switch providers. Owen > > Thanks. > > On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Tony Hain <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Bill, > > > > To avoid the situation of Owen being a lone voice, I have to echo his point > that it is insane that people persist with IPv4-think and extreme > conservation. Allocations longer than a /48 to a residence ensure that > automated topology configuration can’t happen, because /52’s won’t happen and > /56’s are too long for random consumer plug-n-play. Therefore a policy that > /48’s must be swiped ensures that we maintain single subnet consumer > networks. A policy that says /48’s might be swiped (will in a business and > not in a non-residential case) does not reinforce the braindead notion that > longer than /48 has some special meaning beyond the need to kill off a > generation of those with the ‘addresses are a scarce resource’ mindset. > > > > Tony > > > > > > <> > From: ARIN-PPML [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of William Herrin > Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2017 3:12 PM > To: Owen DeLong > Cc: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Equalization of Assignment > Registration requirements between IPv4 and IPv6 > > > > On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 4:49 PM, Owen DeLong <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Consensus hasn’t yet been reached. I agree that there is significant support > for “shorter than /56” actually (not /56 itself). Nonetheless, I don’t > believe that shorter than /56 is the ideal place to put the boundary. > > > > Hi Owen, > > > > I think you're an outlier here. I see consensus that /48 should be swiped and > /56 should not. If there's debate that /52 or /49 should also not be swiped > or that a some more subtle criteria should determine what's swiped, it's not > exactly chewing up bandwidth on the mailing list. > > > > Regards, > > Bill Herrin > > > > > > -- > > William Herrin ................ [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/ > <http://www.dirtside.com/>> > > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> > Please contact [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any > issues. > > > > -- > =============================================== > David Farmer Email:[email protected] > <mailto:email%[email protected]> > Networking & Telecommunication Services > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 > ===============================================
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
