[ppml] 2005-1 status

[Glenn Wiltse]

    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.

Glenn Wiltse

  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
>
>     6.5.8.1. 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.
>
>       6.5.8.2. 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.
>
>       6.5.8.3. 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.
>
> Justification:
>
> 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
>     ARIN.
>
> 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
> gained.
>
> - Kevin
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML mailing list
> PPML at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml
>
> !DSPAM:43e371cf22695494612546!
>
>