ARIN-PPML Message

[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2008-3: Community Networks IPv6 Assignment

I had thought that one of the big advantages of IPv6 is that it was
designed to be simple to renumber.  

Thus I am not sure why having "a stable and globally unique address
assignment" has anything to do with having "a stable internal address
structure" under IPv6.  I can understand why a community network would
need the second thing, but I don't see why they can't have this under
a globally unique address assignment that's made by a LIR instead of
by ARIN.

The community network's internal address structure would NOT change
when their connections to outside networks come and go - under IPv6.

Could the proposers explain what they need, here?  We all what to
support non-profit community networks that help poor people get
online, but at first blush this looks like the proposal authors are
assuming IPv6 == IPv4.


Ted


> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net 
> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Member Services
> Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 12:05 PM
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2008-3: Community Networks 
> IPv6 Assignment
> 
> SUBJECT: Draft Policy 2008-3: Community Networks IPv6 Assignment
> 
> Draft Policy 2008-3
> Community Networks IPv6 Assignment
> 
> The following draft policy text is being posted for feedback 
> and discussion on the Public Policy Mailing List (PPML).
> 
> After the October 2008 Public Policy Meeting the ARIN Advisory Council
> (AC) decided that 2008-3 required more work. The text below 
> was developed by the AC. The AC was required to submit text 
> to ARIN for staff and legal assessment prior to selecting it 
> as a draft policy. The assessment, along with the text that 
> was assessed, is located below the draft policy.
> 
> On 20 March 2009 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) selected Draft Policy
> 2008-3: Community Networks IPv6 Assignment for adoption 
> discussion on the PPML and at the upcoming Public Policy Meeting.
> 
> Draft Policy 2008-3 is below and can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2008_3.html
> 
> We encourage you to discuss Draft Policy 2008-3 on PPML prior 
> to the ARIN XXIII Public Policy Meeting. Both the discussion 
> on the PPML and at the Public Policy Meeting will be used by 
> the ARIN Advisory Council to determine the community 
> consensus regarding adopting this as policy.
> 
> The ARIN Policy Development Process can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
> 
> All of the Draft Policies under discussion can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Member Services
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> 
> 
> ## * ##
> 
> 
> Draft Policy 2008-3
> Community Networks IPv6 Assignment
> 
> Date: 23 March 2009
> 
> Policy statement:
> 
> [Add Section 2.8 to the NRPM.]
> 
> 2.8 Community Network
> 
> A community network is any network organized and operated by 
> a mostly volunteer group operating as or under the fiscal 
> support of a non-profit organization or university for the 
> purpose of providing free or low-cost connectivity to the 
> residents of their local service area. To be treated as a 
> community network under ARIN policy, the applicant must 
> further certify to ARIN that the community network staff is 
> at least 50% volunteer and that the annual budget for 
> community network activities is less than $250,000.
> 
> [Modify 6.5.8.1b as follows.]
> 
> b. qualify for an IPv4 assignment or allocation from ARIN 
> under the IPv4 policy currently in effect or be a qualifying 
> Community Network as defined in Section 2.8, with assignment 
> criteria defined in section 6.5.9.
> 
> [Add Section 6.5.9 to the NRPM.]
> 
> 6.5.9 Community Network Assignments
> 
> 6.5.9.1 Qualification Criteria
> 
> To qualify for a direct assignment, a community network must 
> demonstrate it will immediately provide sustained service to 
> at least 100 simultaneous users and must demonstrate a plan 
> to provide sustained service to at least 200 simultaneous 
> users within one year. For community networks located in 
> rural regions or in the Caribbean and North Atlantic Islands 
> Sector, the numbers in these qualification criteria may be 
> relaxed at ARIN's discretion.
> 
> 6.5.9.2. Initial assignment size
> 
> The minimum size of the assignment is /48. Organizations 
> requesting a larger assignment must provide documentation of 
> the characteristics of the Community Network's size and 
> architecture that require the use of additional subnets. An 
> HD-Ratio of .94 with respect to subnet utilization within the 
> network must be met for all assignments larger than a /48. 
> These assignments shall be made from a distinctly identified 
> prefix and shall be made with a reservation for growth of at 
> least a /44. This reservation may be assigned to other 
> organizations later, at ARIN's discretion.
> 
> 6.5.9.3. Subsequent assignment size
> 
> Additional assignments may be made when the need for 
> additional subnets is justified. Justification will be 
> determined based on a detailed plan of the network's 
> architecture and the .94 HD-Ratio metric. When possible, 
> assignments will be made from an aggregatable adjacent address block.
> 
> 
> Rationale:
> 
> this policy was originally proposed by community network 
> operators to provide them with the ability to receive a 
> direct assignment of IPv6 address resources from ARIN. the 
> operators of such networks have expressed their need to have 
> a stable and globally unique address assignment with which to 
> number their network infrastructure. many such networks are 
> not able to meet the current criteria for a PI IPv6 
> assignment from ARIN. in an environment where connections to 
> outside networks may come and go, a stable internal address 
> structure would be very valuable. additionally, the ability 
> to exchange routes with others, whether locally or tunneled, 
> and thereby have native IPv6 connectivity, would be quite 
> beneficial. these operators were also hopeful that, once this 
> new class of address assignments was created, they could 
> pursue lower annual fees for community networks through the 
> ARIN Consultation and Suggestion Process (ACSP).
> 
> there could also be a number of potential benefits to 
> allowing community network participants to begin using IPv6 
> addressing. some of these networks have many technically 
> capable and adventurous members who would be motivated to 
> begin developing and/or experimenting with the software 
> extensions which will be needed to support IPv6 prefix 
> selection among multiple IPv6 prefixes when establishing 
> remote connections. also, participants in networks receiving 
> such assignments will have the necessary global-ID to 
> experiment with the various proposals currently being 
> developed for separating network locater from network ID.
> 
> also, during the more than one year timeframe that this 
> policy has been under consideration, other people have 
> suggested other scenarios where community networks would 
> provide a valuable resource. one such proposal was discussed 
> at one of the Caribbean Sector meetings where some 
> participants pointed out the efforts were being made in 
> remote or sparsely populated areas to establish community 
> networks which would serve as connections back to educational 
> resources for distant learning capabilities. there are also 
> many still wild areas of North America where such community 
> networks could provide improved connectivity over telephone modems.
> 
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate.
> 
> 
> #####
> 
> 
> ARIN Staff Assessment
> 
> *2008-3*
> 
> *Title: Community Networks IPv6 Allocation*
> 
> *Proposal Submitted: 04 March 2008*
> 
> *Latest Revision Submitted: 06 March 2009 (includes AC revisions)*
> 
> *Date of Assessment: 15 March 2009*
> 
> I. Understanding of the Policy:
> 
> *Staff Understanding of the Proposal:*
> 
> ARIN staff understands this policy would provide an IPv6 
> assignment of a
> /48 or larger to any community network that can demonstrate 
> it will provide service to at least 100 users immediately, 
> and have a plan to demonstrate that it will provide service 
> to at least 200 users within one year.
> 
> II. Comments
> 
> A. ARIN Staff Comments:
> 
> . The title of the policy says "allocation" while this policy 
> is clearly an "assignment" policy. Therefore, the title 
> should be changed. In addition, the title of section 6.5.9 
> should be changed to say "assignment" and not "allocation".
> 
> B. ARIN General Counsel Comments:
> 
> Counsel sees no significant legal or litigation risk 
> regarding this policy.
> 
> III. Resource Impact
> 
> The resource impact of implementing this policy is viewed as 
> minimal. It is estimated that this policy could require up to 
> 1 person month of effort to implement following ratification 
> by the ARIN Board of Trustees. It may require the following:
> 
>     * Guidelines Changes
>     * Staff training
>     * Development of new internal procedures
> 
> Text assessed:
> 
> 2008-3: Community Networks IPv6 Allocation**
> 
> *Policy statement:*
> 
> [Add Section 2.8 to the NRPM.]
> 
> 2.8 Community Network
> 
> A community network is any network organized and operated by 
> a mostly volunteer group operating as or under the fiscal 
> support of a non-profit organization or university for the 
> purpose of providing free or low-cost connectivity to the 
> residents of their local service area. To be treated as a 
> community network under ARIN policy, the applicant must 
> further certify to ARIN that the community network staff is 
> at least 50% volunteer and that the annual budget for 
> community network activities is less than $250,000.
> 
> [Modify 6.5.8.1b as follows.]
> 
> b. qualify for an IPv4 assignment or allocation from ARIN 
> under the IPv4 policy currently in effect or be a qualifying 
> Community Network as defined in Section 2.8, with allocation 
> criteria defined in section 6.5.9.
> 
> [Add Section 6.5.9 to the NRPM.]
> 
> 6.5.9 Community Network Allocations
> 
> 6.5.9.1 Qualification Criteria
> 
> To qualify for a direct assignment, a community network must 
> demonstrate it will immediately provide sustained service to 
> at least 100 simultaneous users and must demonstrate a plan 
> to provide sustained service to at least 200 simultaneous 
> users within one year. For community networks located in 
> rural regions or in the Caribbean and North Atlantic Islands 
> Sector, the numbers in these qualification criteria may be 
> relaxed at ARIN's discretion.
> 
> 6.5.9.2. Initial assignment size
> 
> The minimum size of the assignment is /48. Organizations 
> requesting a larger assignment must provide documentation of 
> the characteristics of the Community Network's size and 
> architecture that require the use of additional subnets. An 
> HD-Ratio of .94 with respect to subnet utilization within the 
> network must be met for all assignments larger than a /48. 
> These assignments shall be made from a distinctly identified 
> prefix and shall be made with a reservation for growth of at 
> least a /44. This reservation may be assigned to other 
> organizations later, at ARIN's discretion.
> 
> 6.5.9.3. Subsequent assignment size
> 
> Additional assignments may be made when the need for 
> additional subnets is justified. Justification will be 
> determined based on a detailed plan of the network's 
> architecture and the .94 HD-Ratio metric. When possible, 
> assignments will be made from an aggregatable adjacent address block.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> 
>