Re: IPv6 addresses really are scarce after all

[Joel Jaeggli <joelja at bogus.com>]

John C Klensin wrote:
> 
> --On Tuesday, 28 August, 2007 15:06 -0700 David Kessens
> <david.kessens at nsn.com> wrote:
> 
>> Thomas,
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 04:09:14PM -0400, Thomas Narten wrote:
>>> We shouldn't be surprised that a "one size fits all" approach
>>> (where home users get the same amount of space by default as
>>> an IBM or Microsoft) doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to
>>> some people.
>> US  	2001:49c0::/32  	2001:49c0::/32  	IBM-IPV6-01
>> US  	2001:4898::/32  	2001:4898::/32		MICROSOFT-IPV6-BLK
>>
>> If there really is a "one size fits all" policy, 
>> where can I get my personal IPv6 /32 allocation ?
> 
> Conversely, if /48 is sufficient for any plausible enterprise,
> is ARIN being appropriately conservative about addresses here?

Are you saying that from where you sit those organizations don't meet
the requirements for an initial allocation as an LIR?

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf