[address-policy-wg] IPv6 allocations for 6RD

I fully agree with Marc: the policy currently allows allocating more 
than /32, so I see no need to change it.

We are facing here a principle discussion.
- the "R" in 6RD stays for "Rapid". And this is the most important point 
to consider. If we can rapidly bring millions of users to IPv6 without 
investing in big hardware/design changes (part. in these crisis times), 
combined with guys like Google/Youtube bringing traffic, then (and only 
then) v6 will become a reality.
So this is in the interest of the RIPE community to make that happens. 
We have a successful POC with Free.fr

- For the RIPE-NCC, this is imho even more important to push for v6 
deployment and therefore to remove any potential obstacle for the ISPs 
and encourage them to implement 6-RD or similar solutions.
If even getting IPv6 addresses becomes a fight, most ISPs may give up, 
since there is still no business case to justify it.
Otherwise, in 2 years, the RIPE-NCC will have to be staffed with only 
2-3 IPRAs and about 50 lawyers, since the market-price for IPv4 
addresses will drive a huge business.
(and to pay the lawyers, the membership fees will have to be about x10)

André


marc.neuckens at belgacom.be wrote:
> I read in the paragraph 4 (IPv6 Policy Principles) of the  IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy :
> 
> ---------------
> 4.4. Consideration of IPv4 infrastructure
> Where an existing IPv4 service provider requests IPv6 space for eventual transition of existing services to IPv6, the number of present IPv4 customers may be used to justify a larger request than would be justified if based solely on the IPv6 infrastructure.
> -------------
> 
> I suppose this justifies the request, no ?
> 
> I don't see any problem in allocating an ipv6 allocation bigger than /32 for ISP with millions of existing customers.
> Who knows how many subnets we will assign in 10, 20 years.
> 
> A /32 is only 2^16 or 16 million /56 subnets or 65536 /48.
> 
> I prefer this than allocate now a /32, in 2 years extend to a /30 and then to a /27 and then an other /27.
> (even if the other /32 in the /27 are not allocated to other LIR)
> 
> It all depends on how future-proof the address plan is.
> 
> What is used now for 6rd and transition can be reused in the LIR for extra customers / applications in 5 years.
> 
> Marc Neuckens
> Belgacom
> 
> 
> **** DISCLAIMER ****
> http://www.belgacom.be/maildisclaimer
>