[arin-ppml] IPv6 Non-connected networks

[William Herrin]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:18 AM, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
> Can we just leave it at that and try to bring the conversation back to how
> we want policy in this area to work.  We need to enable as many people to
> implement the right solution for them.  And not be arguing about what those
> solutions are, which one is best, and who understands them better then the
> other guy.
> [...]
> However, I think something like ULA-Central provides even more improvement,
> and would allow a lot of people to rethink the private addressing issue in
> the IPv6 world.

Concur.


> I believe such a solution should have the following properties;
>
> - Guaranteed uniqueness, via registration, probably the RIRs
>
> - The registration processes should recover assignments no longer in use
>
> - Reverse DNS for those that want it
>
> - Be designated as not to be routed by default, or only routed by special
> agreement, A.K.A not for global reachability
>
> - It should be justified separately from PA or PI addressing, you can have
> both one of these and a PI or PA assignment
>
> - The amount of space an end-user organization qualifies for should be based
> on the number of sites they have
>
> - The amount of space a service provider qualifies for should be based on
> the number of sites they have, not their customer's sites

We have a respectable infrastructure in place which implements this
kind of work reasonably well: the RIRs. Seems to me that a good
starting point would be to add some space and policies for the
assignment and management of ULA-C space, whether we carve that out of
some portion of GUA space or get it from IANA's reserved FC00::/8.

Once we have a policy structure that works for the ULA-C users, we can
reasonably step back and see to what degree the ULA-C practices and
the GUA practices are in close enough sync to unify the policies.

> So, where do we go from here????

If we want to capture FC00::/8 space (which was set aside for this
kind of task) then we should write an internet draft and pass it to
the appropriate IETF WG. Once published as an RFC, the IANA will be
able to delegate portions of FC00::/8 to the RIRs.

In the mean time we can start drafting policies that are agnostic to
whether ULA assignments come from a block of GUA space that ARIN sets
aside from its existing allocation or a new ULA-dedicated one from
IANA.  To do this, we put an activation date in the policy proposal
and direct the board to set aside a distinct block of address space
for the purpose as of that date and leave it to the board's discretion
as to whether they use a ULA-C delegation if one is available. If
ULA-C delegation has made it through IETF by then, great. If not,
great. Either way, we're able to move forward.

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