nanog mailing list archives
Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
From: Heather Schiller <heather.schiller () verizonbusiness com>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 18:00:51 -0500
Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:Except the RIRs won't give you another /48 when you have only used one trillion IP addresses.
Keyword: *Another*
Are you sure? According to ARIN staff, current implementation of policy is that all requests are approved since there are no defined criteria that would allow them to deny any. So far, nobody's shown interest in plugging that hole in the policy because it'd be a major step forward if IPv6 were popular enough for anyone to bother wasting it...S
I believe Stephen is thinking of initial allocation policy - because a subsequent allocation policy in the ARIN region exists: (and it's been modified atleast once in the last few years)
Justification to obtain another netblock is .94 HD-Ratio in the current allocation
Endusers (minimum allocation is a /48) For a /48 that's about 72% utilization or 184 /56's assigned/used ISP's (minimum allocation is a /32) For a /32 that's about 37% utilization or 6,183,533 /56's assigned ARIN provides a handy chart: http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six7
Current thread:
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space, (continued)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Randy Bush (Feb 02)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 02)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Anthony Roberts (Feb 02)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 02)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Mark Andrews (Feb 02)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 03)
- IPv6 space (was: RE: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space ) Deepak Jain (Feb 03)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Stephen Sprunk (Feb 02)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 03)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Trey Darley (Feb 03)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Heather Schiller (Feb 03)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW) Scott Howard (Feb 04)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW) Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 04)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW) Seth Mattinen (Feb 04)
- v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Patrick W. Gilmore (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Howard C. Berkowitz (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Matthew Moyle-Croft (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Mark Andrews (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Matthew Moyle-Croft (Feb 04)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Jack Bates (Feb 05)
- Re: v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space (IPv6-MW)] Iljitsch van Beijnum (Feb 05)