There are certain ISPs that are particularly small or have particularly small or low-population densityOn Aug 2, 2011, at 7:26 PM, John Mann (ITS) wrote:Owen,So, what is the use case for /36 allocations?Why do we want any allocation to be smaller than a /32 (apart from the IXs and Critical Infrastructure exceptions)?service areas for whom a /32 is price-prohibitive. This is an effort to provide a small concession to them.
See above. I think that 1/16th of a normal small ISP is probably about right andOn 3 August 2011 10:19, Owen DeLong <owen at delong dot com> wrote:
A /36 is already a sub-par allocation for an ISP, why would you want to go any smaller?On Aug 2, 2011, at 4:01 PM, John Mann (ITS) wrote:Hi,On 3 August 2011 05:32, Andy Linton <asjl at lpnz dot org> wrote:
...
- Do you support or oppose this proposal?
- Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
tell the community about your situation.
- Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
- Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?I don't see any explanation for the /36 minimum allocation. Why isn't it say /40? or /48?I don't know. Why do we want /36s?If there is a use-case for sub-par allocations, say what it isand then it should be obvious what size it should be.that measure reached consensus in the ARIN region.4. Allow LIRs to request nibble-aligned blocks of any size greater than
or equal to /36.
4.1 The default minimum is /32 unless the provider specifically
asks for a /36.Apart from the generic ...- Reduces the potential for harmful under-sized assignments to end
users by removing any incentive to do so.If the permitted minimum were made even smaller, it may be able to also handle IXs and Critical Infrastructure - http://www.apnic.net/policy/ipv6-address-policy/text section 5.9.2 and 5.9.3 …I would rather have these handled under a separate policy or a specific exemption inthis policy.Otherwise, it is very much a square peg in a round hole.Apart from being confused about /36s, I support this policy,and Andy's call for a whole of IPv6 policy review to fix / remove other corner cases.
+1Owen(Who volunteered for the working group in private mail to Andy)