[address-policy-wg] 2009-05 New Policy Proposal (Multiple IPv6 /32 Allocations for LIRs)

Hi,

On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:28:18AM +0200, Remco van Mook wrote:
> I think you¹re still missing the point that some of us are trying to make. I
> simply don¹t think that the proposal is a good way of solving the problem
> (which is apparently part of a sentence in current policy). Adding a second
> /32 to the global routing table has just as much impact as splitting up a
> /32 in 2 /33s so there¹s no gain there. 

Mmmh, it's actually more than this.  If you are a large multinational ISP,
and run separate networks, these different networks might have completely
different addressing needs, and growth rates.

So one country network might be perfectly happy with a /35, another might 
need a /33, and a third one might grow into a /29 over time...

Splitting a single /32 into something that has no potential for individual
growth is likely to lead to more fragmentation and *more* routes in the
medium run.

(Of course, some other networks know their size perfectly well, and know
that they will not grow much - like a NREN that serves universities that
bring their own address space, so the NREN will likely be happy forever
with a /48 for their infrastructure... (and *could* use PI for that) )

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  128645

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444            USt-IdNr.: DE813185279