Re: Updated ARIN allocation information

[George William Herbert <george.herbert () gmail com>]

Without making a policy proposal, (yet), it might make sense to have a suggestion to ARIN that if it *does* end up 
allocating multiple /28s from one /24 intermediate, that the /24 be regionally reserved so that all sub-blocks are 
physically nearby and could collaborate on a cooperative /24 global announcement and internal side split-out...


-george william herbert
george.herbert () gmail com

Sent from Kangphone

On Jan 31, 2014, at 5:14 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:

> I will attempt to clarify this once more...
>
> When I wrote the policy which created this set-aside space, it was, as Bill has said, intended as a hedge to provide 
> minimal resources for organizations that are unable to obtain larger IPv4 blocks through any normal mechanism 
> (standard allocation/assignment, transfer, market, etc.) and desperately need some space which they can hopefully get 
> routed to support the bare minimum IPv4 connectivity for their IPv6 environment.
>
> I expect that if use of these blocks does become necessary, then routing them will almost certainly be the least of 
> the problems we face in that circumstance.
>
> It is my sincere hope that we come to our senses and implement IPv6 sufficiently that these blocks are never needed. 
> However, as the saying goes, I am hoping for the best and planning for the worst. The ARIN community overwhelmingly 
> supported this idea at the time and that is why we set aside the block in question.
>
> In answer to Tore's statement, this block does not apply the standard justification criteria and I think you would 
> actually be quite hard pressed to justify a /24 from this prefix. In most cases, it is expected that these would be 
> the IPv4 address pool for the public facing IPv4 side of a NAT64 or 464xlat service. Most organizations probably only 
> need one or two addresses and so would receive a /28. It is expected that each of these addresses likely supports 
> several thousand customers in a service provider environment.
>
> Owen
>
>
> > On Jan 31, 2014, at 7:38 PM, Bryan Socha <bryan () serverstack com> wrote:
> >
> > has it be clarified by arin on why they are going to allocate /28s?   seems
> > a faster way to waste ipv4 space with unusable ip addresses?     The only
> > thing I can think of is micro allocations for IX points.
> >
> > *Bryan Socha*
> > Network Engineer
> > 646.450.0472 | *bryan () serverstack com <bryan () serverstack com>*
> >
> > *ServerStack* | Scale Big
> >
> >
> > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 6:58 PM, William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Tore Anderson <tore () fud no> wrote:
> > > > What I fail to understand from this thread is the apparent expectation
> > > > that these smaller-than-/24 microscopic delegations from ARIN will be
> > > > popular.
> > >
> > > Hi Tore,
> > >
> > > There is every expectation that they will be unpopular. They're a
> > > hedge against the possibility of a grueling last-minute IPv6
> > > conversion following a failed IPv4 market. They're something that can,
> > > with difficulty, be made to work. They serve no other purpose.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Bill Herrin
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > William D. Herrin ................ herrin () dirtside com  bill () herrin us
> > > 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> > > Falls Church, VA 22042-3004