[address-policy-wg] Re: getting second IPv6 PA as a LIR

Hi,

On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 08:08:50PM +0200, Daniel Roesen wrote:
> On Tue, May 03, 2011 at 11:57:06AM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
> > Right now, we should try to get rid of conservationist IPv4 thinking,
> 
> You mean like /56 and (much worse) HD-ratio 0.94? :)

Well, I remain to convinced that a typical end-user household can
find uses for more than a 100 different *networks* - but then, it's by 
no means mandatory to assign /56s, as the policy explicitely allows 
assignments of /48 (which we discussed last year in Rome to make it 
very clear how that is currently counted regarding usage ratio).

I can't actually say for which classes of networks a HD-Ratio of 0.94 
will work, and for which classes it might fail.  It does give the ISP 
quite some slack (for example, a /32 is considered "full" if an 
efficiency of 37% is reached - as opposed to the 80% in IPv4 today
[RIPE-512, Appendix A]).  If that is not sufficient or does not really
"fit" real-world networks, maybe we need a different HD-Ratio, or a 
different "fullnesss" metric altogether - your suggestions are welcome.

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
did you enable IPv6 on something today...?

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