[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-138 IPv6 Size Category Alignment

[David Farmer]

Charles,

There is already an attempt to deal with this issue in Draft Policy 
ARIN-2011-3: Better IPv6 Allocations for ISPs, in section 6.5.2.1(b), by 
optionally allowing an ISP to request a /36 if they wish to retain the 
X-small status in the IPv6 world.  This Draft Policy will be up for 
discussion at the San Jaun meeting.

Do you object to that way of dealing with this issue?  If so, why?

The problem I with this proposal is that sets the default billing size 
for all ISPs to the X-small size, which has the probable side effect of 
a significant impact on ARIN's revenue from fees in the long term. 
Where as the approach taken in 2011-3 allows X-small ISPs a choice 
between a smaller allocation (/36) at the lower rate or the normal /32 
at the normal rate.  In theory this should be more or less revenue 
neutral for ARIN.  While not accidentally imposing a rate hike on 
X-small ISPs.

While the fee structure itself is not really a policy issue.  There is 
an undeniable interaction between the minimum allocation size, which is 
a policy issue, and the fee structure, which is not, therefore the two 
issues can not be completely and cleanly separated.

However, if we don't to come to consensus on 2011-3 then we should 
probably deal with this as a separate issue and take up this proposal 
and limit it to this issue only.

On 3/14/11 16:18 CDT, ARIN wrote:
> ARIN-prop-138 IPv6 Size Category Alignment
>
> ARIN received the following policy proposal and is posting it to the
> Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) in accordance with the Policy
> Development Process.
>
> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review the proposal at their next
> regularly scheduled meeting (if the period before the next regularly
> scheduled meeting is less than 10 days, then the period may be extended
> to the subsequent regularly scheduled meeting). The AC will decide how
> to utilize the proposal and announce the decision to the PPML.
>
> The AC invites everyone to comment on the proposal on the PPML,
> particularly their support or non-support and the reasoning
> behind their opinion. Such participation contributes to a thorough
> vetting and provides important guidance to the AC in their deliberations.
>
> Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
>
> The ARIN Policy Development Process can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
>
> Mailing list subscription information can be found
> at: https://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/
>
> Regards,
>
> Communications and Member Services
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>
>
> ## * ##
>
>
> ARIN-prop-138 IPv6 Size Category Alignment
>
> Proposal Originator: Charles Gucker
>
> Proposal Version: 1.0
>
> Date: 14 March 2011
>
> Proposal type: modify
>
> Policy term: permanent
>
> Policy statement:
>
> For IPv6 ISP Classification, the "Size Category" shall be determined
> based on the following schedule:
>
> X-small /32 or smaller
> Small /31 to /30
> Medium /29 to /27
> Large /26 to /24
> X-large /23 to /20
> XX-large /20 and larger
>
> Rationale:
>
> Since the adoption of ARIN Policy 2001-4 and the introduction of the
> IPv6 fee schedule there has existed a discontinuity between the fee
> schedule and the policy language. As the policy is written,
> "6.5.1.1. Initial allocation size Organizations that meet at least one
> of the following criteria are eligible to receive a minimum allocation
> of /32. …", However, the fee schedule currently states that an ISP
> within the X-Small category be allocated "smaller than /40" and the
> Small category of "/40 to /32". As a result, with current policy an
> existing ISP within the X-Small category, when requesting the minimum
> IPv6 allocation, would have to jump Size categories to receive their
> IPv6 Allocation. With the IANA IPv4 runout behind us, it is important
> to eliminate all hurdles for existing Organizations to receive IPv6
> allocations, even the X-Small. This proposal is intended to do just
> that by aligning the Size Category with current policy.
>
> Timetable for implementation: immediate

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota	
2218 University Ave SE	    Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================