[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-21: Last Call

Dale W. Carder dwcarder at wisc.edu
Mon Apr 14 17:58:23 EDT 2008

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 (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?


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list