Updated ARIN allocation information

George William Herbert george.herbert at gmail.com
Sat Feb 1 03:10:18 UTC 2014


Without making a policy proposal, (yet), it might make sense to have a suggestion to ARIN that if it *does* end up allocating multiple /28s from one /24 intermediate, that the /24 be regionally reserved so that all sub-blocks are physically nearby and could collaborate on a cooperative /24 global announcement and internal side split-out...


-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com

Sent from Kangphone

On Jan 31, 2014, at 5:14 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

> I will attempt to clarify this once more...
> 
> When I wrote the policy which created this set-aside space, it was, as Bill has said, intended as a hedge to provide minimal resources for organizations that are unable to obtain larger IPv4 blocks through any normal mechanism (standard allocation/assignment, transfer, market, etc.) and desperately need some space which they can hopefully get routed to support the bare minimum IPv4 connectivity for their IPv6 environment.
> 
> I expect that if use of these blocks does become necessary, then routing them will almost certainly be the least of the problems we face in that circumstance.
> 
> It is my sincere hope that we come to our senses and implement IPv6 sufficiently that these blocks are never needed. However, as the saying goes, I am hoping for the best and planning for the worst. The ARIN community overwhelmingly supported this idea at the time and that is why we set aside the block in question.
> 
> In answer to Tore's statement, this block does not apply the standard justification criteria and I think you would actually be quite hard pressed to justify a /24 from this prefix. In most cases, it is expected that these would be the IPv4 address pool for the public facing IPv4 side of a NAT64 or 464xlat service. Most organizations probably only need one or two addresses and so would receive a /28. It is expected that each of these addresses likely supports several thousand customers in a service provider environment.
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
>> On Jan 31, 2014, at 7:38 PM, Bryan Socha <bryan at serverstack.com> wrote:
>> 
>> has it be clarified by arin on why they are going to allocate /28s?   seems
>> a faster way to waste ipv4 space with unusable ip addresses?     The only
>> thing I can think of is micro allocations for IX points.
>> 
>> *Bryan Socha*
>> Network Engineer
>> 646.450.0472 | *bryan at serverstack.com <bryan at serverstack.com>*
>> 
>> *ServerStack* | Scale Big
>> 
>> 
>>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 6:58 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Tore Anderson <tore at fud.no> wrote:
>>>> What I fail to understand from this thread is the apparent expectation
>>>> that these smaller-than-/24 microscopic delegations from ARIN will be
>>>> popular.
>>> 
>>> Hi Tore,
>>> 
>>> There is every expectation that they will be unpopular. They're a
>>> hedge against the possibility of a grueling last-minute IPv6
>>> conversion following a failed IPv4 market. They're something that can,
>>> with difficulty, be made to work. They serve no other purpose.
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Bill Herrin
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
>>> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
>>> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
> 



More information about the NANOG mailing list