ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Thu Apr 8 13:00:01 CDT 2010


On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 12:50:26PM -0500, Dan White wrote:
> On 08/04/10 17:17 +0000, bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> >	in the IPv4 space, it was common to have a min allocation size of 
> >	a /20 ... or 4,096 addresses ... and yet this amnt of space was
> >	allocated to someone who only needed to address "3 servers"... say
> >	six total out of a pool of four thousand ninty six.  
> 
> Granted, that may have been the case many years ago.
> 
> However, this was not our experience when we obtained addresses, and the
> ARIN rules as I understand them would not allow such an allocation today.

	i picked a fairly recent example - the min allocation
	size has fluctuated over time.  still it is not the case
	that most folks will get -exactly- what they need - they 
	will - in nearly every case - get more address space than
	they need - due to the min allocation rules

> >	Thats a huge amnt of wasted space.  If our wise and pragmatic leaders
> >	(drc, jc, et.al.) are correct, then IPv4 will be around for a very
> >	long time.
> >
> >	What, if any, plan exists to improve the utilization density of the
> >	existant IPv4 pool?  
> 
> I believe your question is based on an outdated assumption.

	and that outdated assumption is?

> Dan White

--bill





More information about the NANOG mailing list