[arin-ppml] Policy to ease transition to IPv6
sleibrand at internap.com
Sat Aug 23 23:50:21 EDT 2008
Michael K. Smith wrote:
>> What can we do to ease the transition to IPv6?
> 2) Remove associations between IPv4 and IPv6 allocations in the NRPM 6.5.8
> so that IPv6 allocations are based solely upon their own merit.
Currently, IPv6 policy for allocation of /48's to end-user orgs includes
current IPv4 policy by reference, which avoids duplicating all the current
text and requirements. In formulating the policy proposal that led to the
addition of 6.5.8 to the NRPM, it's worth noting that there was *a lot* of
discussion about host counts, subnet counts, and many other arcane
details, so in the end we went with the consensus position of "if you
qualify for IPv4, then you qualify for IPv6 too."
Would you be interested in formulating a policy proposal that removes that
reference and replaces it with similar requirements, as is done for LIRs
> 3) Provide a mechanism for legacy holders to obtain IPv6 space without
> having to make any modifications to their existing legacy allocation.
Current policy allows legacy holders to obtain IPv6 space without
reference or modification to their existing legacy address holdings. They
simply apply as a new applicant, under the same set of rules as a new
business who doesn't have or need any IPv4 space from ARIN.
In addition, a clause was recently added to 220.127.116.11 that allows legacy
holders who *don't* qualify as a new LIR or end-user applicant to get IPv6
space, by demonstrating efficient use of their current address holdings
and bringing them under RSA or LRSA. Use of that route is entirely
optional, however: any legacy holder with enough hosts to qualify for a
singly-homed /20 or a multi-homed /22, or is an LIR with a plan for 200
customers, can simply get IPv6 space directly as a new applicant.
Given the above, do you still see any need for policy work in this space?
More information about the ARIN-PPML