Hi
On 15/08/2024 22:02, Matthew Kaufman wrote:
If an organization comes with the technical justification and
financial backing sufficient to really need a /16 as their initial
allocation, staff shouldn't have anything blocking that.
Then you believe that may still be possible ?
I don't understand the concern to leave things are they are so opened
for so distant and near impossible scenario, just because in a very
distant theory it can happen. Do some folks find themselves in a future
scenario that could be one of the them missing it ?
Even in a scenario where a /20 can be justified - which is really a lot
even for any big company - what would be the problem, if really needed
to get a second /20 in the future ?
What is the possible damage to change the policy to restrict in /20 now
? What we, as a community, will lose with that ?
I consider it is better to keep things more realist in this context and
therefore I support the proposal.
Fernando
Matthew Kaufman
On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 2:34 PM David Farmer via ARIN-PPML
<[email protected]> wrote:
/16 is a reasonable limit; keep the current NRPM. One /16
allocation in nearly a decade does not concern me. /16 allocations
were intended to be rare but possible; in fact, I believe the
policy is functioning as intended. If we see several additional
/16 allocations in the next couple of years, I could be convinced
to reconsider my position. But at this point, I think this policy
is premature.
Thanks
On Mon, Aug 12, 2024 at 2:12 PM Elizabeth Goodson
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hello PPML,
As lead shepherd on ARIN-2024-8, I'm reaching out for
additional feedback from the community on this policy
following the robust discussion here in June.
The previous discussion did not come to a clear community
consensus with opinions falling in multiple categories (in no
particular order):
- /20 is a reasonable limit, support the Draft Policy as written
- /16 is a reasonable limit, keep current NRPM
- Allow initial allocations above a certain size that are not
on a nibble boundary (e.g. /19, /18, /17)
- Add clarification about what designs would not justify a
certain size initial allocation (e.g. 6RD)
Questions for the community:
- Do you support the draft policy as written?
- If not, can the policy be changed so you would support it?
What change(s) do you support?
- Should the community continue to work on the policy or
abandon it?
Thanks,
Liz Goodson
===============
Problem Statement:
In order to promote aggregation, the NRPM currently allows
initial allocations up to a /16. However, the entire IPv6
address space only contains 65536 /16s, and the space
allocated to IANA for globally routable purposes only contains
8192 /16s. Therefore, a /16 is a sufficiently large portion of
the IPv6 address space that the goal of conservation starts to
outweigh the goal of aggregation.
Policy Statement:
6.5.2.1b: Replace "In no case shall an ISP receive more than a
/16 initial allocation." with "In no case shall a LIR receive
more than a /20 initial allocation."
==================
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [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
===============================================
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
