[ppml] 2005-1 status

[Kevin Loch]

Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> Thus spake "Kevin Loch" <kloch at hotnic.net>
>> My memory of the last meeting is a bit foggy but I distinctly remember
>> that as a suggestion by several people.  I think it came out of the
>> "one size does not fit all", and "host counts are stupid, why not
>> count subnets or locations" train of thought.
> 
> I agree that one size doesn't fit all, but I think it's more relevant to 
> count the number of subnets than the number of street addresses (or hosts).

Here is an alternative version that starts with default assignment of 
/48 and allows for more with justification for the extra subnets.
I'm not sure if "justify need for additional subnets" is clear enough.
What justifies the use of a subnet?

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 to two or more separate
            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 size of the
         assignment is /48.  Organizations requesting more than a single
         /48 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