[arin-ppml] A modest proposal for IPv6 address allocations

[William Herrin]

So here's a crazy plan:

A. The first IPv6 allocation from ARIN is always a /48. To justify it,
you need to be multihomed. There are no other qualifications. The /48
will be allocated from a pool from which only /48's are allocated.

B. The second IPv6 allocation from ARIN is always a /32. To justify it
you need to demonstrate that you've efficiently used the /48 for some
reasonable definition of efficient, that you've implemented SWIP or
RWHOIS for your downstream assignments and that you will run out of
space in the /48 within one year. The /32 will be allocated from a
pool reserved for allocating /32's.

C. The third IPv6 allocation from ARIN is always a /24. To justify it
you need to demonstrate that you've efficiently used the /32, that you
will run out of space in the /32 within five years, and you have to
first return the original /48 you were assigned. The /24 will be
allocated from a pool reserved for allocating /24's.

D. There is no fourth IPv6 allocation at this time. It is not
presently possible to consume an entire /24 without atrocious waste.

What are the consequences of this plan?

1. Efficient allocation of IP addresses. Orgs get what they need when
they need it and not before without a great deal of guesswork about
actual need.

2. Efficient utilization of BGP routing slots. No single multihomed
org will ever announce more than 2 necessary routes.

3. Traffic engineering routes are trivially filterable since any route
longer than the published allocation size can be presumed to be
traffic engineering, not a downstream multihomed customer, thus you
can filter distant small routes with confidence and ease.

4. No need to define the difference between ISP and not ISP. Everybody
plays by the same rules.

5. No complicated analysis for the first allocation. You're either
multihomed or you're not. If you're multihomed, you qualify.

6. For those who can live within the /48 there are distinct
advantages: no swip or rwhois reporting and the generic end-user
annual fee instead of the ISP annual fee. Once you're up to a /32, you
pay the ISP annual fee. As a result, ARIN doesn't have to scrutinize
the /32 requests too closely either.

Thoughts? Criticisms?

Regards,
Bill Herrin

-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004