[ppml] 2005-1 status
I find the re-working of this proposal as shown here, to be of little
or no value. It gives no explination of what criteria there would be for
obtaining more then a /48.
In general as it relates to this and the earlier version, I object to
the use of the term 'large/complex end sites', since, the biggest need for
these types of direct assignments are for multi homed orginizations, not a
a 'end site'. I belive this policy should be addressing the need of the
'large/complex orginzation' that doesn't want to have their IPv6 address
space directly tied to a ISP/LIR. In my mind, these should not be
considered 'end sites'.
Either way, it seems to me we aren't anywhere near consensus on
this issue, and I don't think this re-work gets us any closer.
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Kevin Loch wrote:
> Marshall Eubanks wrote:
>> Can you prepare a revised version? There has been so much
>> back and forth (some fairly tangential) that I am no longer
>> sure exactly what the new proposal will say.
> Add new subsection in section 6.5 of the NRPM:
> 6.5.8. Direct assignments to large/complex end sites
> 220.127.116.11. To qualify for a direct assignment, an
> organization must:
> a) not be an IPv6 LIR; and
> b) meet at least ONE of the following requirements:
> 1) Have an IPv4 assignment or allocation directly from an RIR,
> the IANA or legacy registry; or
> 2) Qualify for an IPv4 assignment or allocation from ARIN under
> the IPv4 policy currently in effect; or
> 3) Be currently multihomed using IPv6 connectivity to two
> or more separate ARIN LIR's using at least one /48 assigned
> to them by each LIR.
> 18.104.22.168. Direct assignment size to large/multihomed end sites
> Organizations that meet the direct end site assignment criteria
> are eligible to receive a direct assignment. The minimum size
> of the assignment is /48. Organizations requesting a larger
> assignment or a second (or more) assignment must provide
> documentation justifying the need for additional subnets.
> 22.214.171.124. Subsequent Assignment Size
> Additional assignments may be made when the need for additional
> subnets is justified. When possible assignments will be made
> from an adjacent address block.
> In IPv4 policy there are three main types of organizations that
> addresses are delegated to.
> o ISP's receive allocations directly from ARIN or from other ISP's
> o End Users receive assignments from ISP's
> o Large and/or multihomed End Users receive assignments directly from
> The third category is currently missing from IPv6 policy and
> this is believed to be severely hindering deployment by those
> organizations. In IPv6 policy-speak:
> o LIR's receive allocations directly from ARIN
> o End Sites receive assignments from LIR's
> This policy proposes:
> o Large and/or multihomed End Sites receive assignments directly
> from ARIN.
> This policy applies to organizations with networks that are
> large and/or complex enough to justify direct assignments. Like their
> IPv4 counterparts they do not make assignments to external
> organizations. They instead assign space internally to their own
> facilities. Similarly to IPv4 These internal assignments are not
> submitted to ARIN via swip/rwhois.
> A IPv6 network is considered eligible if it is multihomed.
> For transition purposes an organization with an IPv4 assignment or
> allocation from an RIR (or the legacy RIR) is automatically considered
> elligible, regardless of whether they were considered an ISP or End
> User under IPv4 policy. It is expected that the IPv6 only (non
> transition) requirements will be further refined as experience is
> - Kevin
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net