Hi all, I support this policy proposal, however, considering the number of IPv4 addresses available in APNIC and my experience in IPv6/IPv6-Only deployments, I will strongly encourage to allow instead of a single /24, either /24 per each PoP or alternatively allow for /22.
Let me explain the rationale. In many cases ISPs have multiple BGP PoP, for HA reasons, where they may have NAT64 clusters. Each of those clusters (1 or multiple boxes, again for HA purposes), may need to announce its own /24, because this is the minimum accepted in the DFZ. So, if an ISP has 4 PoPs, they will need 4x/24. There is no need to use the /24 only for NAT64, may be internally only /25 is used for the NAT64 (this is very efficient compared to NAT444/CGN as you can see in https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9313/ section 3.4), so still leaves room for DNS or other needs due to the IPv6 transition. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it. _______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
