[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2012-2: IPv6 Subsequent Allocations Utilization Requirement - revised

[Scott Leibrand]

On Sep 26, 2012, at 7:26 AM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:

> Draft Policy ARIN-2012-2
> IPv6 Subsequent Allocations Utilization Requirement
> 
> ARIN-2012-2 has been revised. This draft policy is open for discussion
> on this mailing list and will be on the agenda at the upcoming ARIN
> Public Policy Meeting in Dallas.
> 
> ARIN-2012-2 is below and can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2012_2.html
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Communications and Member Services
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> 
> 
> ## * ##
> 
> 
> Draft Policy ARIN-2012-2
> IPv6 Subsequent Allocations Utilization Requirement
> 
> Date: 26 September 2012
> 
> Policy statement:
> 
> 2.14. Serving Site (IPv6) When applied to IPv6 policies, the term serving site shall mean a location where an ISP terminates or aggregates customer connections, including, but, not limited to Points of Presence (POPs), Datacenters, Central or Local switching office or regional or local combinations thereof. It does not require the implementation of such aggregation in routing, only the implementation of an addressing plan that is subnetted along these topological boundaries to support the ability to aggregate.
> 
> 6.5.3. Subsequent Allocations to LIRs
> 
> a.    Where possible ARIN will make subsequent allocations by expanding the existing allocation.
> 
> b.    An LIR qualifies for a subsequent allocation if they meet any of the following criteria:
> 
> * Shows utilization of 75% or more of their total address space
> 
> * Shows utilization of more than 90% of any serving site

I'm unclear on this one.  If I have one serving site full, and have unused blocks, why shouldn't I allocate an additional block to the full site? Why do I need more space from ARIN?

> 
> * Has allocated more than 90% of their serving site blocks to serving sites, and has sufficient actual utilization at their serving sites to continue to justify the block size being utilized for all serving sites as specified in section 6.5.2.

This one makes sense to me.  If the two above were both required, that would also make sense, but I don't get either/or.

-Scott

> 
> c.    If ARIN can not expand one or more existing allocations, ARIN shall make a new allocation based on the initial allocation criteria above. The LIR is encouraged, but not required to renumber into the new allocation over time and return any allocations no longer in use.
> 
> d.    If an LIR has already reached a /12 or more, ARIN will allocate a single additional /12 rather than continue expanding nibble boundaries.
> 
> Original Rationale:
> 
> If you are executing to a long term plan, you should be able to continue to execute on your approved allocation and assignment plan regardless of the number of regions/groupings you originally planned for. We want to promote tie downs on nibbles and long term planning.
> 
> Timetable for implementation: Immediately
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.