IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [v6ops] How was a /16 of IPv6 asigned from ARIN to non large network?

Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> Mon, 11 December 2023 07:25 UTC

Return-Path: <owen@delong.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A94FC14F5FD for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Dec 2023 23:25:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=delong.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Jf9E05iuB8hk for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Dec 2023 23:25:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from owen.delong.com (owen.delong.com [IPv6:2620:0:930::200:2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F72CC045A50 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Dec 2023 23:24:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([192.168.100.71]) (authenticated bits=0) by owen.delong.com (8.17.1/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 3BB7NOcC2471831 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 11 Dec 2023 07:24:44 GMT
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 owen.delong.com 3BB7NOcC2471831
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=delong.com; s=mail; t=1702279484; bh=nK/NamvCT5XO/evK5Ss+gtdEjfaATYmXDtrOzYwm73M=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References:From; b=Y4bO48VhuR19fF13GoxLMdmsssioqPeEJV5LoV3chcdMTpPeoyTY0svyzPD5rY208 JR6ko4jnNXg0fGu5grtf169HR0YBXui5d55DBhRAmUO2JMui0sX8fXgwhaVZtSWa5c jqTxYC/QQQD7KVk1yXeDvLbZd3c+2lMtw/kPZmQg=
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
Message-Id: <34D9409B-84EC-4729-8515-8C9253FE5C4C@delong.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_9667BBF3-731A-425D-ACC3-0F8B68AEBEBA"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.100.2.1.4\))
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2023 23:24:33 -0800
In-Reply-To: <CAN-Dau1cSD+M8ECJPOVM7Zz8ue=+ZY-90nWodf9FaJapqDsHBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Daryll Swer <contact@daryllswer.com>, list <v6ops@ietf.org>
To: David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu>
References: <CAD9w2qYxwSUEkzkiHspJH4bn9_Tu6YxFqbfv_6tGFYQbPDUUSg@mail.gmail.com> <CACMsEX-sA40NHne0zwGPQ-K3k4mbgodtg05MT_f8ivxBJFUDmw@mail.gmail.com> <CACyFTPF+9qV6RXpcf7t=Mqt5JbC4XE9L72jUnBB=ep71PrOfWA@mail.gmail.com> <B27C12E3-29EA-4946-AF60-B46A7C9EFA62@delong.com> <CACyFTPGvaoCuuhbpzqbOBfoXs52mhBKRQ5XANoCeD+C5PSsVeg@mail.gmail.com> <a568ec62-5adb-e777-123b-86389c856a97@gmail.com> <CAN-Dau1cSD+M8ECJPOVM7Zz8ue=+ZY-90nWodf9FaJapqDsHBQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3774.100.2.1.4)
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.4 (owen.delong.com [192.159.10.2]); Mon, 11 Dec 2023 07:24:44 +0000 (UTC)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/7tuCmYH8ulPPfa5pV7kOfFRYdLA>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] How was a /16 of IPv6 asigned from ARIN to non large network?
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2023 07:25:34 -0000

Actually, if you want to get super technical, more than 3 /22s.

Owen


> On Dec 10, 2023, at 12:11, David Farmer <farmer@umn.edu> wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2023 at 12:31 Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> On 11-Dec-23 04:57, Daryll Swer wrote:
>> >
>> > Even if we aggregate to a /44 per site, /instead/ of /48 per site, that's still an insane 268435456 number of sites!
>> 
>> My concern is that some variant of semantic usage of address bits might be used to justify an excessive address assignment, and perhaps a "considered harmful" style of BCP on this topic, with appropriate IANA Considerations, is needed.
>> 
>> (I have no idea whether that would be relevant to this particular case, of course.)
>> 
>>      Brian
> 
> I would like to remind everyone, by policy ARIN makes nibble-aligned allocations. Therefore to receive a /16, you don’t need to justify a whole /16, you simply need to justify more than a /20.
> 
> Thanks.

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status