[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2009-7: Open Access To IPv6

[Seth Mattinen]

Member Services wrote:
> 
> Draft Policy 2009-7
> Open Access To IPv6
> 
> Version/Date: 31 August 2009
> 
> Policy statement:
> 
> 1) Remove “by advertising that connectivity through its single
> aggregated address allocation” from article 3 of section 6.5.1.1
> 
> 2) Remove article 4 of section 6.5.1.1, “be an existing, known ISP in
> the ARIN region or have a plan for making at least 200 end-site
> assignments to other organizations within 5 years” in its entirety.
> 
> Rationale:
> 
> It is acknowledged that these concepts have been put before the
> community in the past. However, with the wisdom of actual operational
> experience, the necessity of promoting IPv6 adoption throughout our
> region, and emerging native v6 only network models, it becomes obvious
> that these modifications to the NRPM are necessary. Removing the 200 end
> site requirement enables smaller, but no less important and viable,
> networks access to IPv6. Removing the ‘known ISP’ requirement
> enfranchises new, native v6 businesses that can drive innovation and
> expansion in the Internet industry, as well as other industries.
> Removing the requirement for a single aggregate announcement benefits
> the NRPM itself, as it has been decided by the community that it should
> not contain routing advice.
> 
> Timetable for implementation: immediately upon BoT ratification
> 
> #####
> #####
> 
> Staff Assessment
> 
> Proposal: Open Access to IPv6 (proposal #90)
> 
> Proposal Version (Date) 21 May 2009
> 
> Date Assessment Due: 05 Aug 2009
> 
> 1. Proposal Summary (Staff Understanding)
> 
> This policy proposal would modify NRPM section 6.5.1.1 by removing all
> or part of two initial criteria from the the existing IPv6 policy: the
> requirement to advertise the single aggregate and the requirement to
> plan on making 200 end site assignments to customers or be a known ISP
> in the ARIN region. The only remaining criteria to qualify for an IPv6
> allocation are to be an LIR/ISP, not be an end site, and plan on
> providing IPv6 connectivity to organizations and assigning them IPv6
> address space.
> 

I SUPPORT this policy.

If there is concern of gaming/abusing this, then I suggest adding a
clause requiring an existing IPv4 number resource from ARIN in order to
obtain your /32.

-- 
Seth Mattinen		sethm at rollernet.us
Roller Network LLC