The US DOD does not have a /13. I do not know why this myth continues to 
propagate.

Owen

On Sep 15, 2014, at 2:11 PM, HENDERSON MIKE, MR <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> I do not agree with the contention that allocations larger than /28 - e.g. 
> /24 , /20 - will be "too huge".
>  
> In my view there are three factors in play here:
> 1)      we are still "thinking small", a mind-set caused by the scarcity of 
> IPv4 address space
> 2)      we are not considering use cases in the so-called "Internet of 
> Things" where there may be requirements for support of huge client address 
> spaces. As a mind experiment, imagine that one day in the not too distant 
> future Toyota will want a /60 or even a /56 for every vehicle they 
> manufacture. At their current rat of production, close to 10 Million vehicles 
> a year,  they will need huge allocation rather quickly, and of course so will 
> all the other vehicle manufacturers
> 3)      we are forgetting the historical precedent: the Australian Defence 
> Force was allocated a /20 by APNIC in 2007, and the US Department of Defense 
> already has a /13. So we have at least one organisation in APNIC who already 
> thinks that a /20 is 'just right' rather than 'too huge'.
>  
>  
> Regards
>  
>  
> Mike
>  
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] 
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tomohiro -INSTALLER- 
> Fujisaki/?? ??
> Sent: Monday, 15 September 2014 11:56 a.m.
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [sig-policy] New version of prop-111: Request-based expansion of 
> IPv6 default allocation size
>  
> Hi all,
>  
> Thank you again for your comments to prop-111.
>  
> I got several comments for nibble boundary allocation. I think /28 might be 
> OK, but additional allocation after /28 will be too huge with this allocation 
> scheme (that will be /24, /20, ...).
>  
> Here is current summary of nibble boundary allocation.  I would appreciate 
> your additional opinions.
>  
> Advantages:
> - ease of address masking and calculation
> - ease of DNS reverse delegation set up
>  
> Disadvantages:
> - LIRs in legacy space cannot extend prefix to /28
> - allocation size will be too huge (allocations after /28 will be /24, /20..)
>  
> Yours Sincerely,
> --
> Tomohiro Fujisaki
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           
> *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended for the 
> addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not necessarily 
> the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force.  If you are 
> not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or 
> distribute this message or the information in it.  If you have received this 
> message in error, please Email or telephone the sender immediately.
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           
> *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

*              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

Reply via email to