[arin-ppml] New version of Proposal 99
Policy Proposal 99
/24 End User Minimum Allocation Unit
The proposal originator submitted a revised version of the proposal.
The AC will review this proposal at their next regularly scheduled
meeting and decide how to utilize the proposal. Their decision will be
announced to the PPML.
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
Owen DeLong wrote:
> The proposal below is intended to clarify some things and address the
> comments and
> questions from staff in their clarity and understanding document.
> Comments, suggestions, and feedback are welcome.
> TEMPLATE: ARIN-POLICY-PROPOSAL-TEMPLATE-2.0
> 1. Policy Proposal Name: /24 End User Minimum Allocation Unit 2.
> Proposal Originator
> a. name: Owen DeLong
> b. email: owen at delong.com
> c. telephone: 408-890-7992
> d. organization: Hurricane Electric
> 3. Proposal Version: 1.0
> 4. Date: 8/11/09
> 5. Proposal type: new
> 6. Policy term: permanent
> 7. Policy statement:
> Replace section 220.127.116.11 of the NRPM with the following:
> 18.104.22.168 Multihomed Connection
> For multi-homed end-users who demonstrate an intent to announce the
> requested space in a multihomed fashion to two or more distinct ASNs
> not owned or controlled by the end-user, the minimum block of IP
> address space assigned is a /24. If assignments smaller than a /24 are
> needed, multihomed end-users should contact their upstream providers.
> When prefixes are assigned which are longer than /20, they will be
> from a block reserved for that purpose so long as that is feasible.
> End-users may not receive a block smaller than /22 under this policy
> if they already have IPv4 resources from ARIN, except as specified in
> section 22.214.171.124.
> Renumber the existing paragraph under the 4.3.6 to
> 126.96.36.199 Utilization requirements for additional Assignment
> Add the following paragraph 188.8.131.52
> 184.108.40.206 Replacement assignments for small multi-homers
> Any end-user that possesses an assignment smaller than /22 under any
> part of section 4.3 shall not be able to get an additional assignment
> unless they agree to return all existing assignments within 12 months
> of receiving a new assignment. The new assignment shall be sized to
> accommodate their existing utilization in addition to their justified
> additional growth space under section 220.127.116.11. The common cases for
> this are expected to be a /24 returned after receipt of a /23, or a
> /23 returned after receipt of a /22.
> 8. Rationale:
> This policy attempts to incorporate the recent and historical
> discussions of policy for multi-home users on PPML. The intent is to
> provide as fair a process as possible for multi-homed organizations
> down to the smallest feasible size while still preserving some control
> over growth in the routing table.
> It has been repeatedly noted that /24 multi-homers exist today with PA
> space and still occupy a routing table slot, so, it is unlikely that
> moving this boundary to /24 would significantly impact the routing table.
> By requiring smaller assignments to renumber and return, rather than
> add more small blocks to their assignments, this policy seeks to
> further reduce the chances of unnecessary growth in the routing table
> and encourage good aggregation where possible.
> FAQs and responses to Staff Questions
> Does this apply only to end users? Yes, this policy applies only to
> end users. This policy does not represent a good solution for
> organizations that are delegating space to other entities. If a case
> can be made that such a policy is needed for ISPs, then, the author is
> happy to work with interested parties to craft such a policy, but,
> this policy would be unnecessarily onerous on ISPs, and, as an ISP
> policy could be somewhat onerous to their peers and/or upstream
> What about resources obtained from policies other than 4.3 or outside
> of ARIN? Such resources would not be counted for excluding an
> organization from this policy. The intent is to limit IPv4
> micro-allocations for multi-homed end-user organizations under this
> policy to a single assignment unless each such assignment is /22 or
> larger. This is to prevent unnecessary routing table growth. This is a
> tradeoff, and, not the ideal solution for smaller end-user
> organizations, however, author believes that this is the best policy
> likely to gain consensus at this time and believes that it is
> incrementally far better for such organizations than current policy.
> If I grow, I have to renumber? Not necessarily... If you have a /24
> under this policy, and you want to grow that, then, you will likely
> need to renumber. Depending on ARIN resource management and timing,
> ARIN may simply be able to give you the /23 that includes your /24.
> More likely, you will get a new /23, have 1 year to renumber into that
> and return your /24. At most, you would be subject to two such
> renumbering cycles under this policy (24->23 and 23->22) before you
> meet the criteria for other policies which do not require renumbering.
> Other policies don't include renumbering provisions, why this one? The
> policy which allows multi-homed organizations to get a /22 was
> originally written at /24. That policy was shouted down and /22 was
> the compromise achieved to gain community consensus for anything
> smaller than /20. Author hopes that this compromise will allow many
> organizations to get resources they need with minimal impact while
> assuring the community that doing so will not cause an explosion in
> the routing table.
> 9. Timetable for implementation: Immediate
> END OF TEMPLATE
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.