[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-21: Last Call

[Dale W. Carder]

Comments (mostly questions, because I think I must
be missing something) inline,

On Apr 14, 2008, at 3:31 PM, Member Services wrote:
>
> Policy Proposal 2007-21
> PIv6 for legacy holders with RSA and efficient use
>
> Modify NRPM section 6.5.8.1 (Direct assignments from ARIN to end-user
> organizations: Criteria), to read:
>
> To qualify for a direct assignment, an organization must:
>
> 1. not be an IPv6 LIR; and
>
> 2. qualify for an IPv4 assignment or allocation from ARIN under the  
> IPv4
> policy currently in effect,

> or demonstrate efficient utilization of all
> direct IPv4 assignments and allocations, each of which must be covered
> by any current ARIN RSA.

That last phrase is the new part that proposal 2007-21 adds.

> Rationale:
>
> Current policy allows direct IPv6 allocations and assignments to  
> nearly
> all organizations with IPv4 allocations or assignments from ARIN. As a
> result, such organizations can get IPv6 space just as easily as  
> they can
> get IPv4 space, making it easy for them to transition to IPv6 as  
> soon as
> they're ready to do so. However, there are some organizations who
> received IPv4 /23's and /24's prior to the formation of ARIN, and use
> that space in a multihomed, provider-independent fashion. Under  
> current
> policy, such organizations cannot get IPv6 PI space without  
> artificially
> inflating host counts, and are therefore discouraged from adopting  
> IPv6.

Can you point to where in the current policy one would likely
have to inflate host counts to be eligible for IPv6 PI space?

> This policy proposal aims to remove this disincentive, and allow such
> organizations to easily adopt IPv6.

And by "easily", you mean renumbering current IPv4
resources in order to be eligible for IPv6 resources?

> In addition, pre-ARIN assignments were issued through an informal
> process, and many legacy resource holders have not yet entered into a
> formal agreement with ARIN, the manager of many such IP numbering
> resources. This policy proposal would require that such assignments be
> brought under a current ARIN Registration Services Agreement, thereby
> formalizing the relationship.
>
> Some pre-ARIN assignments may not be used efficiently. As unallocated
> IPv4 numbering resources are approaching exhaustion, it is  
> important to
> ensure efficient utilization of IPv4 assignments, and to arrange for
> reclamation of unused space. Therefore, this policy would require that
> the organization wishing to receive IPv6 PI space demonstrate  
> efficient
> utilization of their IPv4 assignment.

Why should historical IPv4 assignments hold up deployment of IPv6?

> The
> intent is that any organization with an assignment of /23 or larger
> which is less than 50% utilized would renumber and return whole unused
> CIDR blocks as necessary to bring the remaining CIDR block to 50%
> utilization or higher.

So you want people to renumber their historical IPv4 assignments
before being allowed to get IPv6 assignments?  Will this really
help v6 get deployed?

Dale