On Feb 1, 2011, at 8:05 PM, George Herbert wrote: > On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 7:46 PM, <valdis.kletni...@vt.edu> wrote: >> On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 03:09:50 GMT, John Curran said: >>> We had a small ramp up in December (about 25% increase) but that is within >>> reasonable variation. Today was a little different, though, with 4 times >>> the normal request rate... that would be a "rush". >> >> Any trending on the rate of requests for IPv6 prefixes? > > More interesting would be re-requests - organizations exhausting an > initial allocation and requiring more. People asking for the first > one just indicates initial adoption rates. > > Other than experimental blocks, I am generally under the impression > that IPv6 allocations are designed to avoid that being necessary for > an extended period of time. If that is not true, then that's a flag. > There are definitely policy changes needed in order to make this true. I doubt that there are many network operators that have deployed enough IPv6 to be up against that wall yet. I know of only one.
ARIN Policy Proposal 121 is intended to improve that situation significantly and also reduce the probability for human-factors related outages in the future in IPv6. Owen
