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

John Santos john at egh.com
Wed Nov 6 18:21:35 EST 2019

On 11/6/2019 03:53 PM, Andrew Dul wrote:
> On 11/6/2019 11:21 AM, John Santos 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?
>> 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?
>> 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?
> The original intent of this rewrite is that the initial assignment or
> allocation will always be a /24.  Any additional assignments will also
> be a /24.  An organization could come back every 6 months to get more
> addresses up to a /21.
> Andrew

And the "sparse allocation" provision is to accommodate that?  Okay, got 
ya.  My worry was the intent was to reduce the /21 max to /24, in which 
case the "spares allocation" provision no longer made sense.

John Santos
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
781-861-0670 ext 539

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list