ARIN-PPML Message

[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv6 Policy Housekeeping - version 2.0

The author submitted a revised version of their proposal.

Regards,

Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)


## * ##

    1. Policy Proposal Name: IPv6 Policy Housekeeping
    2. Author
          1. name:           Leo Bicknell
          2. email:          bicknell at ufp.org
          3. telephone:      901 853 9404
          4. organization:   Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
    3. Proposal Version:     2.0
    4. Submission Date:      8/29/2007
    5. Proposal type:        modify
    6. Policy term:          permanent
    7. Policy statement:

Change I:

    In section 6.5.1.1.d, replace the existing statement with the new
    statement:

        "be an existing, known ISP in the ARIN region or have a plan for
         making at least 200 end-site assignments to other organizations
         within 5 years."

Change J:

    Remove section 6.5.3 entirely.  Update all subsequent sections to
    have new section numbers (6.5.[n-1]).

    Replace part of the text as (new) section 6.5.4.4:

        "All /56 and larger assignments to end sites are required to be
	registered either by the LIR or its subordinate ISPs in
	such a way that the RIR/NIR can properly evaluate the
	HD-Ratio when a subsequent allocation becomes necessary."

Change K:

    Section 6.5.8.2, add the following sentence to the end of the first
    paragraph:

        "An HD-Ratio of .94 must be met for all assignments larger than
         a /48."

    Add to the end of the second paragraph:

        "This reservation may be assigned to other organizations
        later, at ARIN's discretion."

Change L:

    Section 6.5.8.3, add a sentence between the two existing sentences:

        "Justification will be determined based on the .94 HD-Ratio
        metric."

    8. Rationale:

When the IPv6 policy was passed, it was considered to be an "interim"
policy, and it was intended to be similar in all 5 RIR's.  Since that
time it has become clear the policy is no longer interim (and proposal
2007-4 was passed to change just that) and it has also been modified
separately in the different RIR's.

It was brought to the ARIN AC's attention that there were a number of
problems with "Section 6" of the NRPM as a result of this legacy:

* The policy contained a large number of items that were not policy.
* The policy contained a few items that were self contradictory.
* The added text was redundant in some cases with existing text.
* The policy was overly vague in a few areas, leaving ARIN staff to
   have to make interpretations of what the policy intended.
* Policy changes made since the initial IPv6 policy was adopted have
   not always updated all of the relevant sections due to the complexity
   of section 6.

The intent of these changes is not to change any existing policy, but
rather to remove all non-policy items, and update any ambiguous items
with the way that ARIN staff is currently interprets the policy.

Change I:

    Proposal 2005-8 amended section 6.5.4.1 to allow /56 and /64
    allocations, but section 6.5.1.1.d was never updated to match
    the change.  It is believed the intent of the policy, and ARIN
    staff's current interpretation of the policy match the updated
    text.

Change J:

    The first part is not policy, and incorrectly states there is no
    policy as section 6.5.4 has the policy in it.  Take the one useful
    part and make it part of the 6.5.4 criteria.

Change K:

    No metric is currently listed to justify a larger initial
    assignment.  It is believed ARIN staff is currently applying
    the HD-Ratio similar to the ISP policy, this puts that in writing.

    Make it clear that the reservation may not exist in perpetuity.

Change L:

    No metric is given to justify additional assignments.  It is
    believed that ARIN staff is currently applying the HD_Ratio
    similar to the ISP policy, this puts that in writing.

    9. Timetable for implementation: Immediate.
   10. Meeting presenter:            Leo Bicknell

END OF TEMPLATE


Member Services wrote:
> ARIN received the following policy proposal. In accordance with the ARIN
> Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, the proposal is being
> posted to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and being placed on
> ARIN's website.
> 
> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review this proposal at their next
> regularly scheduled meeting. The AC may decide to:
> 
>    1. Accept the proposal as a formal policy proposal as written. If the
> AC accepts the proposal, it will be posted as a formal policy proposal
> to PPML and it will be presented at a Public Policy Meeting.
> 
>    2. Postpone their decision regarding the proposal until the next
> regularly scheduled AC meeting in order to work with the author. The AC
> will work with the author to clarify, combine or divide the proposal. At
> their following meeting the AC will accept or not accept the proposal.
> 
>    3. Not accept the proposal. If the AC does not accept the proposal,
> the AC will explain their decision. If a proposal is not accepted, then
> the author may elect to use the petition process to advance their
> proposal. If the author elects not to petition or the  petition fails,
> then the proposal will be closed.
> 
> The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the
> names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML.
> 
> In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on this proposal on
> the PPML, particularly their support or non-support and the reasoning
> behind their opinion. Such participation contributes to a thorough
> vetting and provides important guidance to the AC in their deliberations.
> 
> The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at:
> http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html
> 
> Mailing list subscription information can be found at:
> http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Member Services
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> 
> 
> ## * ##
> 
> 
> Policy Proposal Name: IPv6 Policy Housekeeping
> 
> Author: Leo Bicknell
> 
> Proposal Version: 1.0
> 
> Submission Date: 8/17/2007
> 
> Proposal type: modify
> 
> Policy term: permanent
> 
> Policy statement:
> 
> Change A:
> 
>     Remove the text between the section 6 header and the section 6.1
>     header.  Remove section 6.1 entirely.  Update all subsequent
>     sections to have new section numbers (6.[n-1]).
> 
> Change B:
> 
>     Move the image in section 6.2 to section 2.
> 
>     Remove sections 6.2.1 to 6.2.6.
> 
> Change C:
> 
>     Move section 6.2.7 to (new) section 2.8, subheading "IPv6".
> 
>     Create section 2.8, subheading "IPv4", containing the following text:
> 
>         In IPv4, utilization is the percentage of the address space
>         allocated or assigned relative to the total address space.
> 
> Change D:
> 
>     Move section 6.2.8 to (new) section 2.8.
>     Move section 6.2.9 to (new) section 2.9.
> 
>     As this leaves section 6.2 empty, remove section 6.2.  Update
>     all subsequent sections to have new section numbers (6.[n-1]).
> 
> 
> Change E:
> 
>     Remove section 6.3.  Update all subsequent sections to have new
>     section numbers (6.[n-1]).
> 
> Change F:
> 
>     Remove section 6.4.1.  Update all subsequent sections to have new
>     section numbers (6.4.[n-1]).
> 
> Change G:
> 
>     Remove section 6.4.2.  Update all subsequent sections to have new
>     section numbers (6.4.[n-1]).
> 
> Change H:
> 
>     Remove section 6.4.4.
> 
> Change I:
> 
>     In section 6.5.1.1.d, replace the existing statement with the new
>     statement:
> 
>         "be an existing, known ISP in the ARIN region or have a plan for
>          making at least 200 end-site assignments to other organizations
>          within 5 years."
> 
> Change J:
> 
>     Remove section 6.5.3 entirely.  Update all subsequent sections to
>     have new section numbers (6.5.[n-1]).
> 
>     Replace part of the text as (new) section 6.5.4.4:
> 
>         "All /56 and larger assignments to end sites are required to be
>          registered either by the LIR or its subordinate ISPs in
>          such a way that the RIR/NIR can properly evaluate the
>          HD-Ratio when a subsequent allocation becomes necessary."
> 
> Change K:
> 
>     Section 6.5.8.2, add the following sentence to the end of the first
>     paragraph:
> 
>         "An HD-Ratio of .94 must be met for all assignments larger than
>          a /48."
> 
>     Add to the end of the second paragraph:
> 
>         "This reservation may be assigned to other organizations
>         later, at ARIN's discretion."
> 
> Change L:
> 
>     Section 6.5.8.3, add a sentence between the two existing sentences:
> 
>         "Justification will be determined based on the .94 HD-Ratio
>         metric."
> 
> Change M:
> 
>     Remove section 6.6.  Update all subsequent sections to have new
>     section numbers (6.[n-1]).
> 
> Change N:
> 
>     Change the title of section 6.7 from "Appendix A: HD-Ratio" to
>     "HD-Ratio".
> 
> Change O:
> 
>     Remove section 6.8.  Update all subsequent sections to have new
>     section numbers (6.[n-1]).
> 
> Rationale:
> 
> When the IPv6 policy was passed, it was considered to be an "interim"
> policy, and it was intended to be similar in all 5 RIR's.  Since that
> time it has become clear the policy is no longer interim (and proposal
> 2007-4 was passed to change just that) and it has also been modified
> separately in the different RIR's.
> 
> It was brought to the ARIN AC's attention that there were a number of
> problems with "Section 6" of the NRPM as a result of this legacy:
> 
> * The policy contained a large number of items that were not policy.
> * The policy contained a few items that were self contradictory.
> * The added text was redundant in some cases with existing text.
> * The policy was overly vague in a few areas, leaving ARIN staff to
>    have to make interpretations of what the policy intended.
> * Policy changes made since the initial IPv6 policy was adopted have
>    not always updated all of the relevant sections due to the complexity
>    of section 6.
> 
> The intent of these changes is not to change any existing policy, but
> rather to remove all non-policy items, and update any ambiguous items
> with the way that ARIN staff is currently interprets the policy.
> 
> Change A:
> 
>     Not policy.  Unnecessary.  Confusing (policy is interim).
> 
> Change B:
> 
>     Sections 6.2.1 to 6.2.6 are definitions that are already defined in
>     section 2.1 to 2.7  Repeating them here is unnecessary.  The picture
>     is useful though, and should be moved to section 2 as part of the
>     definitions.
> 
> Change C:
> 
>     This is a definition item, and should be in the definition section.
>     Also, the v4 versions should be defined at the same time.
> 
> Change D:
> 
>     These are both definitions that should be in the definitions section.
> 
> Change E:
> 
>     This is a manifesto, and is not address policy.  If anything these
>     belong is ARIN's mission statement.
> 
> Change F:
> 
>     Not policy; covered by the RSA as a legal matter.
> 
> Change G:
> 
>     Not policy.  A darn good warning though ARIN should include with
>     any other boilerplate when issuing address space.
> 
> Change H:
> 
>     Not policy, and covered by actual policy statement 6.5.1.2.
> 
> Change I:
> 
>     Proposal 2005-8 amended section 6.5.4.1 to allow /56 and /64
>     allocations, but section 6.5.1.1.d was never updated to match
>     the change.  It is believed the intent of the policy, and ARIN
>     staff's current interpretation of the policy match the updated
>     text.
> 
> Change J:
> 
>     The first part is not policy, and incorrectly states there is no
>     policy as section 6.5.4 has the policy in it.  Take the one useful
>     part and make it part of the 6.5.4 criteria.
> 
> Change K:
> 
>     No metric is currently listed to justify a larger initial
>     assignment.  It is believed ARIN staff is currently applying
>     the HD-Ratio similar to the ISP policy, this puts that in writing.
> 
>     Make it clear that the reservation may not exist in perpetuity.
> 
> Change L:
> 
>     No metric is given to justify additional assignments.  It is
>     believed that ARIN staff is currently applying the HD_Ratio
>     similar to the ISP policy, this puts that in writing.
> 
> Change M:
> 
>     References, while useful on the web page and in template instructions
>     are not policy.
> 
> Change N:
> 
>     It's not an appendix.  It's not even at the end.
> 
> Change O:
> 
>     The background information would be something nice to archive on the
>     ARIN web site somewhere, but is not policy and should be removed from
>     the policy manual.
> 
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy
> Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN Member Services
> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>