[ppml] Comments on revised 2005-1 proposal of 2006-02-03

Fri Feb 10 10:28:24 EST 2006

Hi Thomas-

On Feb. 8, you asked "How many direct /22 IPv4 assignments have been made to
date? That
   is, how many organizations do we think would qualify? Are we
   talking a few thousand? tens of thousands? or?"

Under policy 2002-3 "Address Policy for Multi-homed Networks" (implemented
in May 2004), ARIN has issued: 

  244 /22s 
  176 /21s 

Regards,
Leslie Nobile
Director, Registration Services
ARIN

-----Original Message-----
From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of
Thomas Narten
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 5:09 PM
To: Kevin Loch
Cc: ppml at arin.net
Subject: [ppml] Comments on revised 2005-1 proposal of 2006-02-03

> 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

I agree with others about the "complex" wording not being helpful. IMO, we
are fine just changing this to:

    6.5.8. Direct assignments to large 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

I have a hard time supporting giving owners of "legacy" IPv4 registrations
automatic IPv6 space. This just perpetuates the "early adopter" program
(e.g., those that got big assignments prior to the the RIRs, get similar
treatment in IPv6).

Also, IMO, it's not enough to have "an IPv4 assignment or allocation
directly from an RIR"; there are different types of assignments/allocations.
We should restrict giving out IPv6 PI space that satisfy specific criteria.

Indeed, I'm not sure why 1) is even needed. I think item 2) (that
follows) is a better justification and can subsume 1).

>          2) Qualify for an IPv4 assignment or allocation from ARIN under
>             the IPv4 policy currently in effect; or

With some caveats, since not all allocations are the same (e.g., getting
space for anycast, etc.)

>          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.

IMO, being multihomed in IPv4 should also be sufficient justification.
One argument I keep hearing is that "we're assigning PI space in IPv4 for
multihoming, and the system is working". So let's try and leverage that
experience.

>        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.

I suspect that /48 is too small, if we are aiming at the biggest end sites.
E.g., take sites that have O(100K) subnets. According the HD ratio
thresholds, that would correspond to (I think) a /44.

One thing that I would find helpful is if there is any data available
concerning sizes of organizations (in terms of networks/devices/users). How
many organizations have 100K subnets? Is that number small enough that we
can use it as a threshhold to give everyone with 100K subnets a PI
assignment?

Although the following is far from perfect, using number of employees might
be attractive in that it is information that is often publically available,
and gives a very rough indication of number of machines (assume some
multiple of machines/subnets per employee). But I recall from previous
discussions, people preferred more relevant criteria like numbers of
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.

Perhaps specifically tie this back to the the HD ratio.

So, here is a revised strawman based on the comments above:

Add new subsection in section 6.5 of the NRPM:

   6.5.8. Direct assignments to large end sites

     6.5.8.1. To qualify for a direct assignment, an organization
              must:

       a) not be an IPv6 LIR;

       b) meet all of the following requirements:

         1) Qualify for an IPv4 direct assignment from ARIN under the
            IPv4 policy currently in effect [specifically, Section
            4.3, excluding microassignments. Note also that this means
            end site must qualify for a /22 if multihoming. Is this
            bar high enough?].

         2) Be currently multihomed using IPv4 or IPv6 as defined in
            "ARIN Number Resource Policy Manual Version 2005.1 -
            September 7, 2005"

	    [note: text referred to is:

	    2.7. Multihomed

	    An organization is multihomed if it receives full-time
	    connectivity from more than one ISP and has one or more
	    routing prefixes announced by at least two of its upstream
	    ISPs. ]

       6.5.8.2. Direct assignment size to large end sites

         Organizations that meet the direct end site assignment
         criteria given in Section 6.5.8.1 are eligible to receive a
         direct assignment.  The minimum size of the assignment is a
         /40. Larger assignments will be made when justified using the
         existing IPv6 applied HD ratio as given in Section 6.5.

	 Assignments will be made out of a specially designated
	 address block that indicates a direct assignment to an
	 endsite.

       6.5.8.3. Subsequent Assignment Size

         An organization may receive an additional assignment when it
         has grown to include enough distinct physical locations to
         justify the larger assignment. Where possible, the assignment
         will be made from an adjacent address block.

================================================================

So, what do people think of the above? An improvement? Still some
unacceptable points?

Questions relating to above:

1) How many direct /22 IPv4 assignments have been made to date? That
   is, how many organizations do we think would qualify? Are we
   talking a few thousand? tens of thousands? or?

Thomas
_______________________________________________
PPML mailing list
PPML at arin.net
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml