new 6bone pTLA prefix proposal, comments by 4 March 2002 please

[Robert Elz]

    Date:        Sun, 17 Feb 2002 17:47:25 -0800
    From:        Bob Fink <fink@es.net>
    Message-ID:  <5.1.0.14.0.20020217173855.01f221d8@imap2.es.net>

  | Basically I propose changing from the /28 prefixes we now allocate to /32:

Sounds like a good idea to me.


  | 1. requiring existing pTLA /24 and /28 holders to renumber to a new /32,

I'm not too worried about pTLA usage, but I think this would be a good idea.

We need a lot more renumbering testing, and this looks like it would be a
good way to show people what is involved, and gain a lot more data about what
more is needed.   The only justification for not doing it should (I think)
be that a /32 isn't big enough for the number of addresses currently allocated
(or expected to be in the very near future).   And those people should still
have to renumber - just back into a different one of the bigger blocks (after
others have been returned by those renumbering into a /32)

I think I'd tend to make the time limit closer to 3 months than 6 though.

And while I don't have a pTLA, I do have addresses allocated by those who do,
and so this means that I get to renumber because of 2nd hand action, which
is something that we should be making very very clear will happen, and
preparing for.

The rest of your proposals I have no particular opinion on - I suspect that
just forcing the 6bone space into renumbering from time to time will drive
away the commercial users without the need for any specific policies, nor
the need to go and attempt to ensure compliance.

So, all this sounds like exactly what the 6bone should be being used for.

kre