[arin-ppml] LAST CALL - Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Improved IPv6 Registration Requirements

Carlton Samuels carlton.samuels at gmail.com
Wed Oct 11 19:25:20 EDT 2017


Support as written.

-CAS


==============================
*Carlton A Samuels*

*Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment &
Turnaround*
=============================

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:16 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:

> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) met on 6 October 2017 and decided to send
> the following to Last Call:
>
> Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Improved IPv6 Registration
> Requirements
>
> The AC provided the following statement to the community:
>
> "Based on strong community support - on both the Public Policy Mailing
> List and in person at ARIN 40 during the policy consultation - for
> replacing the "should" qualifier in section 6.5.5.4 with "shall", the
> Advisory Council, after careful review and discussion, has made the
> requested change to the text."
>
> Feedback is encouraged during the Last Call period. All comments should be
> provided to the Public Policy Mailing List. This Last Call period will
> expire on 10 November 2017. After Last Call, the AC will conduct their Last
> Call review.
>
> The full text is below and available at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/
>
> The ARIN Policy Development Process is available at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
>
> Regards,
>
> Sean Hopkins
> Policy Analyst
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>
>
>
> AC's Statement of Conformance with ARIN's Principles of Internet Number
> Resource Policy:
>
> This proposal is technically sound and enables fair and impartial number
> policy for easier IPv6 Registrations. The staff and legal review noted a
> single clarification issue which has been addressed. There is ample support
> for the proposal on PPML and no concerns have been raised by the community
> regarding the proposal.
>
> Problem Statement:
>
> Current ARIN policy has different WHOIS directory registration
> requirements for IPv4 vs IPv6 address assignments. IPv4 registration is
> triggered for an assignment of any address block equal to or greater than a
> /29 (i.e., eight IPv4 addresses). In the case of IPv6, registration occurs
> for an assignment of any block equal to or greater than a /64, which
> constitutes one entire IPv6 subnet and is the minimum block size for an
> allocation. Accordingly, there is a significant disparity between IPv4 and
> IPv6 WHOIS registration thresholds in the case of assignments, resulting in
> more work in the case of IPv6 than is the case for IPv4. There is no
> technical or policy rationale for the disparity, which could serve as a
> deterrent to more rapid IPv6 adoption. The purpose of this proposal is to
> eliminate the disparity and corresponding adverse consequences.
>
> Policy statement:
>
> 1) Alter section 6.5.5.1 "Reassignment information" of the NRPM to strike
> "assignment containing a /64 or more addresses" and change to
> "re-allocation, reassignment containing a /47 or more addresses, or
> subdelegation of any size that will be individually announced,”
>
> and
>
> 2) Alter section 6.5.5.2. "Assignments visible within 7 days" of the NRPM
> to strike the text "4.2.3.7.1" and change to “6.5.5.1"
>
> and
>
> 3) Alter section 6.5.5.3.1. "Residential Customer Privacy" of the NRPM by
> deleting the phrase "holding /64 and larger blocks"
>
> and
>
> 4) Add new section 6.5.5.4  "Registration Requested by Recipient" of the
> NRPM, to read: "If the downstream recipient of a static assignment of /64
> or more addresses requests publishing of that assignment in ARIN's
> registration database, the ISP shall register that assignment as described
> in section 6.5.5.1."
>
> Comments:
>
> a.    Timetable for implementation: Policy should be adopted as soon as
> possible.
>
> b.    Anything else:
>
> Author Comments:
>
> IPv6 should not be more burdensome than the equivalent IPv4 network size.
> Currently, assignments of /29 or more of IPv4 space (8 addresses) require
> registration. The greatest majority of ISP customers who have assignments
> of IPv4 space are of a single IPv4 address which do not trigger any ARIN
> registration requirement when using IPv4. This is NOT true when these same
> exact customers use IPv6, as assignments of /64 or more of IPv6 space
> require registration. Beginning with RFC 3177, it has been standard
> practice to assign a minimum assignment of /64 to every customer end user
> site, and less is never used. This means that ALL IPv6 assignments,
> including those customers that only use a single IPv4 address must be
> registered with ARIN if they are given the minimum assignment of /64 of
> IPv6 space. This additional effort may prevent ISP's from giving IPv6
> addresses because of the additional expense of registering those addresses
> with ARIN, which is not required for IPv4. The administrative burden of
> 100% customer registration of IPv6 customers is unreasonable, when such is
> not required for those customers receiving only IPv4 connections.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20171011/9141a72e/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list