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

[Leif Sawyer]

Jason -


   The reason for the "should"  (as opposed to shall, or must)  is because, after careful consideration by staff and legal,
there is no method of enforcement, by ARIN, upon the ISP to actually provide the registration.

But leaving it in as "should"  is to hopefully provide additional guidance to reticent companies who receive
requests from their downstreams, as to what the appropriate action is.

I hope that brings some clarity to your questions, and I'll let ARIN speak directly and specifically to them.

From: ARIN-PPML [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Jason Schiller
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 11:18 AM
To: ARIN
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Improved IPv6 Registration Requirements

[External Email]
I oppose as written.

There should not be a different standard of requirement for:
- re-allocation
- reassignment containing a /47 or more addresses
- subdelegation of any size that will be individually announced

which is "shall"

and Registration Requested by Recipient

which is "should"


I would support if they are both "shall".


Can ARIN staff discuss what actions it will take if an ISP's
down stream customer contacts them and explains that their
ISP refuses to SWIP their reassignment to them?

Will they do anything more than reach out to the ISP and tell
them they "should" SWIP it?

How does this course of action differ if the customer intends to
route the space individually?

How does this course of action differ if the customer holds other
direct allocations, and or re-allocates for another provider?

How does this course of action differ if the customer has down
stream customers?

___Jason






On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:03 PM, Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com<mailto:jschiller at google.com>> wrote:
current policy:

6.5.5.1. Reassignment information
Each static IPv6 assignment containing a /64 or more addresses shall be registered in
the WHOIS directory via SWIP or a distributed service which meets the standards set forth in
section 3.2. Reassignment registrations shall include each client's organizational information,
except where specifically exempted by this policy.

6.5.5.2. Assignments visible within 7 days
All assignments shall be made visible as required in section 4.2.3.7.1 within seven calendar
days of assignment.

6.5.5.3. Residential Subscribers
  6.5.5.3.1. Residential Customer Privacy
  To maintain the privacy of their residential customers, an organization with downstream
  residential customers holding /64 and larger blocks may substitute that organization's
  name for the customer's name, e.g. 'Private Customer - XYZ Network', and the customer's
  street address may read 'Private Residence'. Each private downstream residential
  reassignment must have accurate upstream Abuse and Technical POCs visible on the
  WHOIS record for that block.


New proposed policy:

6.5.5.1. Reassignment information
Each static IPv6
+ re-allocation, reassignment containing a /47 or more addresses, or subdelegation of any
+ size that will be individually announced,

shall be registered in
the WHOIS directory via SWIP or a distributed service which meets the standards set forth in
section 3.2. Reassignment registrations shall include each client's organizational information,
except where specifically exempted by this policy.

6.5.5.2. Assignments visible within 7 days
All assignments shall be made visible as required in section
+ 6.5.5.1
within seven calendar
days of assignment.

6.5.5.3. Residential Subscribers
  6.5.5.3.1. Residential Customer Privacy
  To maintain the privacy of their residential customers, an organization with downstream
  residential customers
  may substitute that organization's
  name for the customer's name, e.g. 'Private Customer - XYZ Network', and the customer's
  street address may read 'Private Residence'. Each private downstream residential
  reassignment must have accurate upstream Abuse and Technical POCs visible on the
  WHOIS record for that block.

6.5.5.4 Registration Requested by Recipient
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 should register
that assignment as described in section 6.5.5.1.

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:31 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net>> wrote:
On 21 September 2017, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) advanced the following Draft Policy to Recommended Draft Policy status:

ARIN-2017-5: Improved IPv6 Registration Requirements

The text of the Recommended Draft Policy is below, and may also be found at:

https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_5.html<https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_5.html>

You are encouraged to discuss all Recommended Draft Policies on PPML
prior to their presentation at the next ARIN Public Policy and Members Meeting. PPML and PPC discussions are invaluable to the AC when
determining community consensus.

The PDP can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html<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<https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.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 should 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<mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml<http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml>
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.



--
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com<mailto:jschiller at google.com>|571-266-0006<tel:(571)%20266-0006>




--
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com<mailto:jschiller at google.com>|571-266-0006

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20170927/cdb4f2c6/attachment.htm>