[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-10: Minimum IPv6 Assignments

[Owen DeLong]

> On Sep 24, 2015, at 12:37 , John Springer <springer at inlandnet.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi PPML,
> 
> There have been a number of public discussions regarding the ins and outs of IPV6 subnet allocation. One such starts here:
> http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2014-October/070339.html
> 
> My recollection of the outcomes of these discussions is a sort of rough consensus that /48 is a good idea and indeed, many of the calculations used to evaluate what size of V6 block an org should request, start with that assumtion.
> 
> ARIN (speaking as myself, not a member of any group and roughly paraphrasing someone more authoritative than I) does not dictate what you do with addresses after the allocation has been received. In some cases, ARIN looks at what you do with addresses when you come back for more and might not give them to you depending on what choices you have made.
> 
> That is what this Draft Proposal seeks to do.
> 
> I think it is clear that we can do that. Should we?
> 
> And if you have an opinion of no, are you able to say because it is technically unsound or unfair and partial?

This isn’t really necessary, John. A proposal must be fair, technically sound, and have support of the community in order to be adopted.

Just because it is technically sound and/or fair does not mean that the community must support it.

People are free to reject a policy for any reason, though I admit a bias in favor of at least some rationale for rejection.

Owen

> 
> John Springer
> 
> On Wed, 23 Sep 2015, ARIN wrote:
> 
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2015-10
>> Minimum IPv6 Assignments
>> 
>> On 17 September 2015 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted "ARIN-prop-224 Minimum IPv6 Assignments" as a Draft Policy.
>> 
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2015-10 is below and can be found at:
>> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2015_10.html
>> 
>> You are encouraged to discuss the merits and your concerns of Draft
>> Policy 2015-10 on the Public Policy Mailing List.
>> 
>> The AC will evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance
>> of this draft policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet Number Resource
>> Policy as stated in the PDP. Specifically, these principles are:
>> 
>>  * Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
>>  * Technically Sound
>>  * Supported by the Community
>> 
>> The ARIN Policy Development Process (PDP) can be found at:
>> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
>> 
>> Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
>> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Communications and Member Services
>> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>> 
>> 
>> ## * ##
>> 
>> 
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2015-10
>> Minimum IPv6 Assignments
>> 
>> Date: 23 September 2015
>> 
>> Problem Statement:
>> 
>> ISPs may believe that they have an incentive to obtain smaller blocks than they really need, and once they receive their allocation may subsequently issue blocks smaller than their customers may need in the future. This policy seeks to encourage the correct behavior by reiterating the smallest reasonable sub-allocation size and by discounting any space which has been subdivided more finely from any future utilization analysis.
>> 
>> Policy statement:
>> 
>> Modify section 2.15 from "When applied to IPv6 policies, the term "provider assignment unit" shall mean the prefix of the smallest block a given ISP assigns to end sites (recommended /48)." to "When applied to IPv6 policies, the term "provider assignment unit" shall mean the prefix of the smallest block a given ISP assigns to end sites. A /48 is recommended as this smallest block size. In no case shall a provider assignment unit for the purpose of this policy be smaller than /56."
>> 
>> Modify section 2.16.1 from "A provider assignment unit shall be considered fully utilized when it is assigned to an end-site" to "A provider assignment unit shall be considered fully utilized when it is assigned in full (or as part of a larger aggregate) to a single end-site. If a provider assignment unit (which shall be no smaller than /56) is split and assigned to multiple end-sites that entire provider assignment unit shall be considered NOT utilized."
>> 
>> Comments:
>> Timetable for implementation: IMMEDIATE
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
>> 
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.