Moving to IPV6

[Robert E. Seastrom]

Josh Smith <juicewvu at gmail.com> writes:

> I realize that there are definitely more reasons for deaggregation
> than "we got the addresses at different times problem" I was just
> trying to point out that one of the major (i think??) contributors to
> the size of the current ipv4 routing table is at least potentially
> addressed by new allocation policies for ipv6 address space.

I think it buys us some time, puts us further back on the flat part of
the curve.  It is not, however, a silver bullet in the exponential
nature of the graph.  If nothing else, entropy is gonna get us over
time.

> I know the policy document I linked to is quiet old however it was the
> newest revision I could find with a very quick google before I sent my
> reply to the thread.  If you have a link to an updated policy document
> I would be very interested in reading it.

You could read the ARIN Number Resource Policy Manual for some insight
into how things are supposed to be done today.  Codified policy and
how things actually bear out in practice are not 100% congruent due to
areas that are left open for interpretation.

I do not believe that the IANA document you cited has been superseded.
It predates the NRO Memorandum of 2003, which was signed because the
various RIRs realized they needed a way to work together
constructively to do things like this document.

Further stuff germane to global number policy can be found at
http://www.nro.net/ and should be reflected in ARIN's NRPM
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html

> I think we are both in agreement that ipv6 is a huge step forward from
> ipv4 and while it may introduce some new, perhaps currently unknown,
> problems it is a step forward for the internet as a whole.  I'm also
> an operational geek with interests (albeit it from the sidelines) in
> the internet numbers policy world.

You ought to join ARIN's PPML mailing list, if for no other reason
than to see what is up.

> While we are talking about ipv6 allocations does anyone know if there
> are any plans for an ipv6 allocation similar to the network 44 ipv4
> (ampr.org) allocation for hams?

There was a policy proposal in the ARIN region, 2008-3, "Community
Networks IPv6 Assignment" which cited amateur radio packet use as a
possible deployment scenario.

Given the international nature of amateur radio, the proper authority
to issue an amateur radio assignment would be IANA directly rather
than any particular RIR.

I'm unaware of anyone actively pursuing this.

-r