[ppml] Proposed Policy: Changes to IPv6 initial allocation criteria

Member Services info at arin.net
Wed Oct 11 18:46:50 EDT 2006

ARIN received the following policy proposal. In accordance with the ARIN
Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, the proposal is being
posted to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and being placed on
ARIN's website.

The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review this proposal and may decide to:

1. Accept the proposal as a formal policy proposal as it is presented;
2. Work with the author to:
    a) clarify the language or intent of the proposal;
    b) divide the proposal into two (2) or more proposals; or
    c) combine the proposal with other proposals; or,
3. Not accept the proposal as a formal policy proposal.

Since this proposal was received within 10 days of the next scheduled
meeting of the ARIN Advisory Council, the review period will be extended
to the regularly scheduled meeting that occurs after the upcoming meeting.

If the AC accepts the proposal or reaches an agreement with the author,
then the proposal will be posted as a formal policy proposal to PPML and
it will be presented at a Public Policy Meeting. If the AC does not
accept the proposal or can not reach an agreement with the author, then
the AC will notify the community of their decision with an explanation;
at that time the author may elect to use the petition process to advance
their proposal. If the author elects not to petition or the petition
fails, then the proposal will be considered closed.

The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at:

Mailing list subscription information can be found at:


Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)

## * ##

Policy Proposal Name: Changes to IPv6 initial allocation criteria

Author: Jordi Palet Martinez

Proposal Version: 1

Submission Date: 11/10/2006

Proposal type: delete

Policy term: permanent

Policy statement:

Delete section d. of NRPM


The existing policy is fine for an existing and known ISP in the ARIN
region, but is not considering the case of new ISPs, which may want to
start offering IPv6 services. Is artificial to ask them for start with
IPv4 services (which typically will do, but not necessarily), wait for
weeks/months (?) to be "known", and then come back for the IPv6
allocation request.

In addition to that, they need to have a plan for more than 200 /48
assignments. The first question here is that there is room for business
with one or just a few IPv6 customers, and it seems irrational not
allowing this type of business to be possible, may be even it can be
considered against the anti-trust regulations.

Second point is regarding the usage of the /48. An ISP may decide to
assign a different prefix size, example a cellular operator with
probably will use /64.

Is important to clarify that the "200" comes from historical reasons
when this proposal was jointly developed with RIPE and APNIC, but the
situation is that other regions such as LACNIC and AfriNIC already got
rid of this requirement, and in both, RIPE and APNIC is under
discussion. This may even bring to a possible "untrue" plan to be
suggested by an ISP if he needs to get an IPv6 prefix allocated.

Regarding the restriction of the usage in 5 years, I think is enough
with the criteria indicated in c that the address space is advertised,
as there is no ISP interested in getting a prefix which is not being
used. Is an operational cost that doesn't make sense if there is not
business beyond covering it, never mind if we talk about a few months or
a few years.

In summary, the proposal will allow new ISPs, ISPs with a reduced number
of customers, or ISPs willing to offer only IPv6 services, to
immediately access this resource.

No financial/liability implications for the community and ARIN are
foreseen, on the other way around, it will allow ARIN better fulfilling
its mission.

No special conditions, fees, exceptions, etc. seem to be required.

Timetable for implementation: Immediate

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list