[ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv6 HD ratio

[Azinger, Marla]

I see the same thing from all the postings.

However...keeping the scope of the proposal on track at the next conference is what will be a challenge.

MA

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On Behalf Of Bill
Darte
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 9:43 AM
To: ppml at arin.net
Subject: RE: [ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv6 HD ratio


There has been great discussion on this list about aspects of IPv6
conservation beyond what the current policy specifies. 

One of the major components of that conservation discussion has been
changing the HD Ratio for subsequent allocations.  The change to .94 from .8
in the proposed policy change arises from work by Geoff Huston and his
presentation at the ARIN XV meeting IPv6 Roundtable along with others.

It seems to me following the various threads that there is little resistance
to the HD Ratio change.  

Bill Darte
CAIT - Washington University in St. Louis

>
> 
> 
> Policy Proposal Name: IPv6 HD ratio
> 
> Author: Andrew Dul
> 
> Policy term: permanent
> 
> Policy statement: Change HD ratio used for IPv6 allocations to 0.94
> 
> This would modify sections 6.5.2.2 & 6.7 (including the 
> HD-ratio to percentage table) of the NRPM.
> 
> Rationale: Recent research has shown that based upon certain 
> growth models the current IPv6 allocation policy using the HD 
> ratio of 0.8 will allocate between a /1 and /4 of Ipv6 
> address space over the period of about 60 years.
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-huston-ipv6-hd-metric-00.txt
> 
> By changing the HD ratio to 0.94, this would require LIRs to 
> have a higher utilization of the /48s that are assigned to 
> end sites before being able to obtain additional allocations. 
>  This policy would change the threshold for an LIR holding a 
> /32 from approximately 11% to 51%. An LIR with a /20 would 
> have a utilized percentage of approximately 31% vs. the current 2%.
> 
> This policy may also prevent the hoarding of IPv6 addresses 
> by current organizations with large customer bases, but no 
> substantial current IPv6 network.
> 
> Timetable for implementation: Within 30 days of ratification 
> by the BoT.
> 
> 
>