Hi, On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 10:37:34AM +0200, Jan Ingvoldstad wrote: > Although I'd personally like to see stricter requirements and smaller > allocations sizes for IPv6 in general,
Slightly off-track, but you made me curious. Given the number of /29s and
/32s available in FP001, and the potential numbers of LIRs in the future
(like, things explode and we'll see 100.000 LIRs) - where do you see the
problem with our allocation sizes?
I think we should balance between "too big" (aka: FP001 fills up, and
new LIRs won't be able to get what they need [or we start using FP010])
and "too small" (aka: LIRs will have to squeeze inside, and resort to
unwanted behaviour, like "give customers only a single /64" or even
"single /128").
I see "/32 as default, up to /29 if you ask" as very reasonable middle
ground...
Gert Doering
-- speaking as IPv6 user who does math
--
have you enabled 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 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
pgp7pxgYF6Q3q.pgp
Description: PGP signature
