The current proposal language says: /47 or shorter are SWIP’d in all cases. /48 or longer are SWIP’d if they are independently announced.
Owen > On Jul 24, 2017, at 11:53 , Paul McNary <pmcn...@cameron.net> wrote: > > What does the new language say? > I then am totally confused as I am with the rest of the NPRM! > > So many contradictions using Missouri English. > > Paul > > > On 7/24/2017 1:22 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> That’s not what the new language actually says. >> >> Owen >> >>> On Jul 20, 2017, at 13:26 , Paul McNary <pmcn...@cameron.net> wrote: >>> >>> Yes >>> >>> /48 is the SWIP boundary. /48 is SWIP'ed. >>> /49 is not. >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> >>> On 7/20/2017 3:07 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: >>>> My recommendation was “shorter than /48” which would essentially mean the >>>> same thing. >>>> >>>> Owen >>>> >>>>> On Jul 17, 2017, at 15:46 , hostmas...@uneedus.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>> The language of "b)" actually makes more sense with a /47: >>>>> >>>>> Each static IPv6 assignment containing a /47 or more addresses, or >>>>> subdelegation of any size that will be individually announced, shall be >>>>> registered in the WHOIS directory via SWIP or a distributed service which >>>>> meets the standards set forth in section 3.2. >>>>> >>>>> The major difference is that this language eliminates the SWIP >>>>> requirement for /48 blocks that are not announced, but all larger blocks >>>>> require SWIP, and blocks smaller than /48 are also exempt and of course >>>>> also non-routeable. >>>>> >>>>> This is best for those that think SWIP should be limited to only blocks >>>>> that are individually announced. I could go either way on this issue. >>>>> >>>>> Albert Erdmann >>>>> Network Administrator >>>>> Paradise On Line Inc. >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, 17 Jul 2017, Leif Sawyer wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Shepherd of the draft policy chiming in. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the lively discussion, everybody. There's certainly a lot >>>>>> to think about here. >>>>>> >>>>>> Just as a reminder to folk, the current policy under question is located >>>>>> here: >>>>>> https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six551 >>>>>> >>>>>> And, to help clarify some confusion, per 6.5.5.3.1 >>>>>> (https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six5531) >>>>>> residential customers "holding/64 and larger blocks" may use censored >>>>>> data, i.e. "Private Customer/Residence" >>>>>> in lieu of actual names and street addresses. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> With that said, I have a couple of questions to ask, based on potential >>>>>> rewrites that are brewing. >>>>>> >>>>>> First: Assuming a preference for /56 (based on PPML feedback) for >>>>>> the moment, which is the more >>>>>> preferential rewrite of the opening sentence of 6.5.5.1? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> a) Each static IPv6 assignment containing a /55 or more addresses >>>>>> shall be registered in the WHOIS directory via SWIP or a distributed >>>>>> service which meets the standards set forth in section 3.2. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> b) Each static IPv6 assignment containing a /55 or more addresses, >>>>>> or subdelegation of any size that will be individually announced, shall >>>>>> be registered in the WHOIS directory via SWIP or a distributed service >>>>>> which meets the standards set forth in section 3.2. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Second: Given your specific choice of A or B, are you preferentially >>>>>> inclined to choose the provided bit-boundary, or "/48" >>>>>> >>>>>> Third: If none of these options are palatable, do you have a proposed >>>>>> approach? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Leif Sawyer >>>>>> Advisory Council >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> PPML >>>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>>>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >>>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>>>> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> PPML >>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>>> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.