[ipv6-wg at ripe.net] Policy for allocation of IPv6 address space from IANA to RIRs

Hi,

On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 11:26:57AM +0200, Pim van Pelt wrote:
> I think that reserving /8s is better than /6s. The DNS issue is one
> thing, the scalability question in (1) is another. A /8 should be enough
> for a RIR in the midterm future, if a RIR explodes (IP space wise) they
> can always be plugged into another /8 in the future. I think this will
> be a more stable situation than scaling down from /6s to /7s (as Gert
> suggested).

However you label it (/8s that can grow into a /6, or /6s that can be shrunk
into /7s, if needed) doesn't make a real difference.

The important thing about the "/6 approach" is that the initial /12s
(growing to /8s) are allocated with so much room in between that you
*can* grow to a /7 or /6, if necessary, and don't have to start a
second (or even more) block per RIR.

Gert Doering
        -- NetMaster
-- 
Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations:  65398  (60210)

SpaceNet AG                 Mail: netmaster at Space.Net
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14   Tel : +49-89-32356-0
80807 Muenchen              Fax : +49-89-32356-299