Re: /48 micro allocations for v6 root servers, was: national security

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch at muada.com>]

On 8-dec-03, at 21:00, Paul Vixie wrote:

> for example, bill says above that "/35 routes
> are being discouraged" and that's probably true but "by whom?" and 
> "where?"

It is generally understood in the routing community that some kind of 
prefix length filtering is desirable and/or necessary. So the question 
becomes: on which bit boundary do we filter? This question seems to be 
answered by:

http://lacnic.net/en/chapter-4.html
http://ftp.apnic.net/apnic/docs/ipv6-address-policy
http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv6-policies.html
http://www.arin.net/policy/ipv6_policy.html
http://www.iana.org/ipaddress/ipv6-allocation-policy-26jun02

(All the same document, slightly different versions.) It says:

"4.3. Minimum Allocation

RIRs will apply a minimum size for IPv6 allocations, to facilitate 
prefix-based filtering.

The minimum allocation size for IPv6 address space is /32."

I don't see how giving out micro allocations can possibly be compatible 
with this policy.