ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Thu Apr 8 12:17:40 CDT 2010


On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 09:54:21AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> 
> On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:54 AM, TJ wrote:
> 
> >> 
> >> IPv6-only content won't be meaningful for years yet, and IPv6-only
> >> eyeballs will necessarily be given ways to reach v4 for many years
> >> to come.
> > 
> > 
> > To be fair - IPv6 only content may not exactly be commonplace, but there are
> > IPv6-only networks out there ... they just tend to consist of "things"
> > rather than "people".
> > 
> > For the "surfable internet", the chicken-and-egg scenario continues - as
> > more services get reachable, it should create impetus for users - all dual
> > stack (hopefully) ... until a threshold is crossed, when it becomes more
> > feasible to be a general consumer who was IPv6-only (or really bad IPv4
> > alongside it).  I also think "for years" and "for many years" are very
> > relative terms :) ...
> > 
> > 
> > /TJ
> 
> I think that the creation of consumers with IPv6-only or really bad IPv4
> along side it will result sooner than any threshold of IPv6-ready content
> is reached.  I think this will be the result of not having IPv4 addresses
> to give those consumers rather than the result of IPv6 deployment.
> 
> Owen
> 

	on the other side of the pond, the Euros are grappling with
	a desire to get actual utilization of assigned numbers into
	something above single digits.  They are shooting for 80%
	utilization of all assets before assigning any additional 
	numbers.

	this problem has been around for a -very- long time, predating 
	the RIRs by a couple of decades.  the gist is, virtually 
	-every- allocation/delegation exceeds the actual demand - sometimes
	by many orders of magnitude.

	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.  

	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?  

--bill






More information about the NANOG mailing list