Re: [sig-policy] Proposal 99
Yi Chu
Sprint
________________________________________
From: sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net [sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] on behalf of Terence Zhang YH [zhangyinghao at cnnic dot cn]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 3:23 AM
To: Ren-Hung Hwang; SIG policy
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Proposal 99
I cannot speak for the authors, but what I understand is:
Sparse allocation tries to make sure an organization get contiguous IPv6 space,
but prop-099 tries to make sure each PoP within an organization also get contiguous IPv6 space.
For example, under the current situation, when an organization gets an /32, and
there are 4 PoPs in this organization, he will sub-allocate /34 to each PoP,
next time this organization get another /32, and also sub-allocate /34 to
each PoP, although the 2*/32 can be aggregated as /31, each PoP's 2*/34
can't be aggregated since they are from different /32.
In the above example, sparse allocation tries to ensure the 2*/32 are contiguous,
but prop-099 tries to ensure the 2*/34 are contiguous.
Regards
Terence Zhang
CNNIC
----- Original Message -----
From: Ren-Hung Hwang<mailto:rhhwang at gmail dot com>
To: SIG policy<mailto:sig-policy at apnic dot net>
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Proposal 99
>Message: 7
>Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 10:51:31 +1200
>From: Dean Pemberton <dean at deanpemberton dot com<mailto:dean at deanpemberton dot com>>
>Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Proposal 99
>To: Xing Li xing at cernet dot edu dot cn<mailto:xing at cernet dot edu dot cn>
>Cc: "sig-policy at apnic dot net<mailto:sig-policy at apnic dot net> SIG List" <sig-policy at apnic dot net<mailto:sig-policy at apnic dot net>>
>Message-ID:
> <CACfPNNSQ-8oS3K0GmdR3EDLYrF18Cf=9LThcsvJCTLvUvUqPkg at mail dot gmail dot com<CACfPNNSQ-8oS3K0GmdR3EDLYrF18Cf=9LThcsvJCTLvUvUqPkg at mail dot gmail dot com">mailto:CACfPNNSQ-8oS3K0GmdR3EDLYrF18Cf=9LThcsvJCTLvUvUqPkg at mail dot gmail dot com>>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
>Thank you for that reference.
>
>The example in your slides shows a situation where a /27 is required
>over a multi year period but that under the current system this is
>allocated as two /29s and a /28. Your presentation claims that this
>causes problems with non-optimal network design.
I am also interested to know why this example cannot be resolved
by APNIC's current sparse allocation policy.
Regards,
Ren-Hung
>
>I am interested to hear from Sanjaya or the hostmasters if this would
>actually be a problem in reality.
>
>If I were a member who came to APNIC with comprehensive documentation
>showing a network rollout over 5 years which needed a /27, would this
>be allocated under provisions in the following section of
>apnic-089-v010
>
>------
>5.2.3 Larger initial allocations
>Initial allocations larger than /32 may be justified if:
>
>a) The organization provides comprehensive documentation of planned
>IPv6 infrastructure which would require a larger allocation;
>------
>
>In other words, if I can show that I have a need for larger network,
>can this be currently addressed without the need to change policy.
>
>Regards,
>Dean
--
Ren-Hung Hwang
Research Distinguished Professor
Dept. of Computer Science & Information Engineering
National Chung Cheng Univ.
Chia-Yi, Taiwan, 621
http://exodus.cs.ccu.edu.tw/~rhhwang
WebOffice: http://mmc.elearning.ccu.edu.tw/home/rhhwang
________________________________
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
________________________________
This e-mail may contain Sprint Nextel proprietary information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.