[address-policy-wg] Re: [ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Policy for allocation of IPv6 address space from IANA to RIRs

>>> IPv6 things have been too conservative
>> oh, you have run out of space?
> 
> I haven't, but people tell me that I'm supposed to build hierarchy into
> my network, give every customer an insanely large address block *and*
> do all this out of a /32.  Which will work for smallish ISPs like us,
> for the foreseeable future - but the question remains: what is gained
> by handing out /32s?  A chance to reach 2^29 routing table entries
> (which would be the result if all of FP001 is handed out as /32s)?
> 
> Being too conservative on address block size which *will* lead to
> additional routing table entries.
> 
> Note that I'm not advocating to give each ISP a /12 or even a /16 - but
> something better balanced (a /24, for example) would be, umm, "better
> balanced".

perhaps allocation should be needs-based as opposed to these fixed
blocks?  both at the rir and the lir levels.  after all, why are we
paying for all those hostmasters if not to help make some intelligent
decisions?

randy