[ppml] IPv6 incentive policy
owen at delong.com
Wed Aug 22 01:33:02 EDT 2007
On Aug 21, 2007, at 10:08 PM, Scott Leibrand wrote:
> Are you sure #9 is the most important? I thought it was #10. :-)
Take your pick. Unfortunatley, I hear that Mr. Goldberg will be
unavailable to present
at the meeting, due to a most unfortunate lack of pulse, so, I may be
forced to present
this if the AC moves it forward.
> I'm also interested to know what the units of D are. You said the
> "number of delays". I think you meant days, but in that case D
> would always be 1 until C got larger than F. Perhaps you meant for
> D to be measured in years, such that if F is 100x as big as C,
> you'd have a delay of .01 years (3.65 days)?
Yes... D is in days. I suppose some scalar could be multiplied by D
to cause these effects to be more pronounced early on and grow faster.
I think that 400 might be a good starting number such that C/F=0.01
result in 4 days, but, C/F=.5 would produce 20 days.
Admittedly, I didn't spend much time thinking about fine-tuning the math
prior to posting this. I do, however, think that if we fine tune the
value to be applied to D, we will end up with a result which comes
close to what Mr. Anderson has proposed in a much less computationally
intensive and much more predictable delay-producing policy.
So... Assuming we can find a scalar value, would you support or oppose
Modifications included inline below.
Thanks for your suggestions.
> Owen DeLong wrote:
>> The recent discussion of IPv4 rationing got me to thinking, and,
>> this is the conclusion I came to. I will point out that item 9
>> is probably the
>> most significant information in the template.
>> Template: ARIN-POLICY-PROPOSAL-TEMPLATE-1.0
>> 1. Policy Proposal Name: IPV6 incentive through IPv4 processing
>> 2. Author
>> a. name: Owen DeLong
>> b. email: owen at delong.com
>> c. telephone: 408-921-6984
>> d. organization: DELONG
3. Proposal Version: 1.1
>> 4. Submission Date: August 21, 2007
>> 5. Proposal type: new
>> 6. Policy term: temporary
>> 7. Policy statement:
>> In order to encourage organizations to use IPv6 rather than IPv4,
>> will introduce a delay in processing new IPv4 applications which is
computed such that D=X*C/F where D is the number of delays which
>> ARIN will wait to process the IPv4 template, C is the number of IP
>> addresses currently in use by the applicant, and, F is the number of
>> IP addresses currently in the IPv4 free pool (computed as the sum of
>> the IP addresses in the ARIN free pool and the addresses remaining
in the IANA free pool). X shall be defined as _____. (See rationale
>> ARIN may completely process the IPv4 template and reserve the
>> addresses, collect fees, etc. immediately upon receiving the
>> using it's normal process. However, a delay shall be introduced
>> which shall start on the date of the final data submission by the
>> applicant prior to approval, and, which shall extend D days such
>> that the value of D is computed as defined in the preceding
>> paragraph. If the value of D is computed to anything less than
>> one, then, it shall be treated as if the value was 1.
>> IPv6 templates shall be processed immediately without any delay.
>> This policy shall expire when the IPv4 free pool becomes double
>> the size of the IPv4 free pool as of April 1, 2008.
>> 8. Rationale:
>> Apparently, some people feel that running out of free IPv4 addresses
>> will be bad. This proposal provides a self-regulating mechanism
>> for delaying that date by gradually increasing the time it takes to
>> receive a new allocation or assignment from ARIN as the free
>> pool shrinks.
>> The fewer free addresses there are, the longer it will take to
>> receive an assignment or allocation. Further, it has the additional
>> advantage that it will provide faster allocations and assignments
>> to those organizations which have smaller existing IP resource
>> pools from which to draw while extending the delay factor for
>> those few organizations which are already consuming the vast
>> majority of IP address resources.
Defining X -- This policy is deliberately incomplete. It is
expected that the AC will judge consensus of the community
towards a value of X and, at the time of promoting this policy
to last call will replace the text "X shall be defined as _____.
(See rationale section)." with "X shall be defined as <number>"
where <number> is replaced with the actual number judged
to be the consensus of the community.
The policy author believes that 400 is a good starting value
for X. The community is encouraged, when commenting on
this proposal to state their desired value for X as part of their
comments. Higher values of X will create a steeper ramp
and longer initial delays. Lower values of X will create a
more dramatic curve that starts to pick up later.
>> 9. Timetable for implementation: April 1, 2008
>> 10. Meeting presenter: Ruben Garret L. Goldberg
>> END OF TEMPLATE
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the
>> ARIN Public Policy
>> Mailing List (PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the
>> ARIN Member Services
>> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML