[arin-ppml] LAST CALL: Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2019-3: Update 4.10 – IPv6 Deployment Block

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Wed Nov 6 14:57:01 EST 2019



> On Nov 6, 2019, at 11:21 , John Santos <john at egh.com> wrote:
> 
> On 11/6/2019 12:57 PM, ARIN wrote:
> 
>> This policy attempts to address these issues, by raising the minimum size to a /24 and limits total amount an organization can receive to a /21. It also removes the requirement for return and renumber, since that was primarily added to allow organizations to obtain larger blocks if that was necessary. The policy also clarifies the utilization requirements by placing them directly in this section rather than a reference to the utilization requirements of end users.
>> Policy Statement:
>> Replace current 4.10 with the following updated section
>> 4.10 Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 Deployment
>> ARIN shall allocate a contiguous /10 from its last /8 IPv4 allocation from IANA. This IPv4 block will be set aside and dedicated to facilitate IPv6 deployment. Allocations and assignments from this block must be justified by immediate IPv6 deployment requirements. Examples of such needs include: IPv4 addresses for key dual stack DNS servers, and NAT-PT or NAT464 translators. ARIN staff will use their discretion when evaluating justifications.
>> This block will be subject to a minimum and maximum size allocation of /24. ARIN should use sparse allocation when possible within that /10 block.
> 
> This contradicts the statement above that the maximum allocation or assignment is a /21, not a /24.  Or is it intended that the initial allocation or assignment is always a /24, but the recipient can later ask for more, up to a /21, with appropriate justification?

I believe that is the intent and that it remains from the original policy. I do not believe that 4.10 ever allowed for distribution of more than a /24 at one time (though there is a proposal in last call now to change that for the MDN case).

> Or is it worded that way so that if an applicant comes back for a second (or subsequent) allocation/assignment under this section (for a second discrete network?) they may receive no more than a /21 in total?

This policy proposal is distinct from the MDN policy proposal which seeks to modify the same section in a different way to support MDN. The /21 wording in this proposal is a holdover from the original and not a modification of the original 4.10 intent if memory serves me correctly. I think it is best for everyone if we do not conflate the two proposals or the discussion about them any more than is necessary. Please review that proposal and post any questions or comments in a thread related to that proposal.

> Also, if the allocation or assignment is a /24, no more and no less, what is the point of the 2nd sentence that ARIN should use sparse allocation?  Is it so applicants taking a second dip will, if possible, get a contiguous /24 each time?

Sparse allocation allows ARIN to have a greater potential to provide contiguous blocks later if the organization in question comes back for additional space at a later date. If ARIN uses consecutive allocation, then the entity that received X.X.2.0/24 comes back for a second block and someone else will already have X.X.3.0/24. OTOH, if ARIN uses sparse allocation, odds are good that ARIN can issue the original requestor X.X.3.0/24 creating X.X.2.0/23.

I hope that clarifies the situation.

Owen



More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list