[address-policy-wg] 2011-04, "Extension of the Minimum Size for IPv6 Initial Allocation"

On Mon, 14 Nov 2011, James Blessing wrote:
>
> It seems that the consensus is that up to a /29 is the right amount of
> space for the majority of networks, if that is the case I've  think we
> should add the following:
>
> ==
>
> 5.1.x
>
> Organisations that have already received their initial allocations are
> able to request additional address space up to a /29 without supplying
> of further documentation as if they were a first time requestor.
>
> ==
>
> The logic being that this solves the problem for networks who deployed
> before this change and avoids the issues with HD ratio (which I think
> needs some looking at, but not here)
>

I agree with this, and also with the general theme of the proposal of 
extending the initial allocation size. I do not feel that it is sensible 
to tie this into a specific transition mechanism so am happy with the more 
generic proposal that has been put together that will also allow better 
scalability in long term addressing plans.

One thing that I do wonder is whether the (limited) overhead of the NCC 
processing these requests mean it is more desirable to limit this 
"re-request" to a single shot per-LIR (which will likely push people to 
request the whole /29), or whether permitting multiple requests grabbing a 
/32 at a time (up to the /29) is desirable. Personally I assume that most 
networks using this policy extension would go for the /29 straight off, 
but then there maybe further interaction with the charging scheme which 
dissuades this.

-- 
Tom Hodgson
tom at someaddress.net