Talk:IPv6 Addressing Plans
From ARIN IPv6 Wiki
It looks like there is a typo on this page.
"Any prefixes shorter than /48 will only be assigned when there is written justification to show that this prefix will meet the RIR HD ratio guidelines within 5 years."
There is nothing in the NRPM (that I could find) that requires an organization to meet the RIR HD ratio within 5 years. The policy only says that justification must be documented and evaluated by the RIR.
From the NRPM on assigning larger than /48:
"184.108.40.206. Assignment of multiple /48s to a single end site
When a single end site requires an additional /48 address block, it must request the assignment with documentation or materials that justify the request. Requests for multiple or additional /48s will be processed and reviewed (i.e., evaluation of justification) at the RIR/NIR level.
Note: There is no experience at the present time with the assignment of multiple /48s to the same end site. Having the RIR review all such assignments is intended to be a temporary measure until some experience has been gained and some common policies can be developed. In addition, additional work at defining policies in this space will likely be carried out in the near future."
The only reference to "5 years" I could find in the NRPM is when assigning a /56.
The following guidelines may be useful (but they are only guidelines):
* /64 when it is known that one and only one subnet is needed * /56 for small sites, those expected to need only a few subnets over the next 5 years. * /48 for larger sites
This was intended to be a strawman proposal
I was really hoping that more people would register for the wiki and explain how and why they are designing their addressing plans. This has little to do with the NRPM and the 5 years was something that might (or might not) be a good idea. I think that every ISP should have some expectation on when they will need to go back for an additional IPv6 allocation. In the text that was quoted, I was assuming that the ISP had a plan to go back to ARIN in about 5 years, and therefore had an internal target to be in compliance with ARIN's HD ratio rules by that point in time.
8. Assign a /64 per LAN
For clarity, this should be reworded to include VLANs and / or subnets
In section 12, there is the point:
Do not assign from PoP aggregates
I suspect that this is less specific than what was originally intended, especially since earlier points specifically recommend the creation of PoP aggregates. One point even suggests that a PoP have two aggregates: one for infrastructure addressing (i.e., loopbacks) and another for customer space. Regardless, the use of PoP aggregates should be strongly encouraged. Very shortly, we will be coming up to a point where networks will reach a scale that requires the deployment of multiple levels of link state IGPs. To not be able to aggregate the infrastructure routes (or the customer routes associated with the PoP) would seriously impact IGP scalability.