[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Updated ARIN allocation information
- Subject: Updated ARIN allocation information
- From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
- Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 10:34:56 -0500
- In-reply-to: <CAL9jLabq=CSJSv4hufv+LSJ4d2JBhLQPukDcX3gxtc6-1PZA=A@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CF0EE31C.1920A%[email protected]> <[email protected]> <CAL9jLabq=CSJSv4hufv+LSJ4d2JBhLQPukDcX3gxtc6-1PZA=A@mail.gmail.com>
As the author of the policy which set this block aside, I speak only from my perspective as the author and not officially on behalf of ARIN or the AC in any way:
The intent is to provide very small allocations/assignments for organizations which need some amount of IPv4 for a best-effort to facilitate networking after IPv4 general runout.
While I recognize that organizations may or may not be able to get these routes accepted, the reality is that IPv4 runout is going to create interesting routing scenarios and other problems. I figured having a predictable prefix where people could at least make a best effort was better than simply allowing chaos through the entire address space.
Indeed, much popcorn will be required. That is why my networks are all IPv6 capable already.
Owen
> On Jan 29, 2014, at 10:22 PM, Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Seth Mattinen <sethm at rollernet.us> wrote:
>>> On 1/29/14, 14:01, Leslie Nobile wrote:
>>>
>>> Additionally, ARIN has placed 23.128.0.0/10 in its reserves in accordance
>>> with the policy "Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 Deployment" (NRPM
>>> 4.10). There have been no allocations made from this block as of yet,
>>> however, once we do begin issuing from this block, the minimum allocation
>>> size for this /10 will be a /28 and the maximum allocation size will be a
>>> /24. You may wish to adjust any filters you have in place accordingly.
>>
>>
>>
>> I know ARIN doesn't care about routability and all that, but good luck with
>> those /28s.
>
> maybe these weren't meant to be used outside the local ASN? :)
> I do wonder though what the purpose of this block is? If it's to be
> used inside the local ASN (as seems to be indicated based upon minimum
> allocation sizes) then why not use the IETF marked 100.64/10 space
> instead? Global-uniqueness? ok, sure...
>
> There will need to be popcorn though, for this event.
>
> -chris