[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3: IPv6 Nano-allocations
John Sweeting
jsweeting at arin.net
Wed Apr 15 19:18:02 EDT 2020
Hi Andrew,
The numbers around this are:
320 3x small RSPs
30 have applied and been approved for IPv6 of which 26 closed with no action to complete by the requester. The other 4 are currently still open and pending action.
Thanks,
John S.
On 4/15/20, 11:30 AM, "Andrew Dul" <andrew.dul at quark.net> wrote:
John,
Could you provide the community with a rough magnitude of this issue?
Approximately how many of these 3x-small ISP organizations have come to
ARIN and requested IPv6? How many accepted the block and how many
refused because of the fee issue? How many 3x-small ISP organizations
does ARIN currently serve.
Thanks,
Andrew
On 4/14/2020 2:29 PM, John Sweeting wrote:
> All,
>
> For anyone interested in the content of the "Policy Experience Report presented by Registration
> Services to the AC at its annual workshop in January 2020" referenced in the problem statement you can see that report here:
>
> https://www.arin.net/about/welcome/ac/meetings/2020_0124/policy_experience_report.pdf
>
> Thank you.
>
> On 3/24/20, 1:22 PM, "ARIN-PPML on behalf of ARIN" <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net on behalf of info at arin.net> wrote:
>
> On 19 March 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted
> "ARIN-prop-285: IPv6 Nano-allocations" as a Draft Policy.
>
> Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3 is below and can be found at:
>
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2020_3/
>
> You are encouraged to discuss all Draft Policies on PPML. 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 Policy Development Process (PDP). Specifically, these
> principles are:
>
> * Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
> * Technically Sound
> * Supported by the Community
>
> The PDP can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/
>
> Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/
>
> Regards,
>
> Sean Hopkins
> Policy Analyst
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>
>
>
> Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3: IPv6 Nano-allocations
>
> Problem Statement:
>
> ARIN's fee structure provides a graduated system wherein organizations
> pay based on the amount of number resources they consume.
>
> In the case of the very smallest ISPs, if a 3X-Small ISP (with a /24 or
> smaller of IPv4) gets the present minimal-sized IPv6 allocation (a /36),
> its annual fees will double from $250 to $500/year.
>
> According to a Policy Experience Report presented by Registration
> Services to the AC at its annual workshop in January 2020, this
> represents a disincentive to IPv6 adoption with a substantial fraction
> of so-situated ISPs saying "no thanks" and abandoning their request for
> IPv6 number resources when informed of the impact on their annual fees.
>
> This can be addressed by rewriting subsection 6.5.2(b). Initial
> Allocation Size to allow allocation of a /40 to only the smallest ISPs
> upon request, and adding a new clause 6.5.2(g) to cause an automatic
> upgrade to at least a /36 in the case where the ISP is no longer 3X-Small.
>
> Reserving /40s only for organizations initially expanding into IPv6 from
> an initial sliver of IPv4 space will help to narrowly address the
> problem observed by Registration Services while avoiding unintended
> consequences by accidentally giving a discount for undersized allocations.
>
> Policy Statement:
>
> Replace the current 6.5.2(b) with the following:
>
> b. In no case shall an LIR receive smaller than a /32 unless they
> specifically request a /36 or /40.
>
> In order to be eligible for a /40, an ISP must meet the following
> requirements:
> * Hold IPv4 direct allocations totaling a /24 or less (to include zero)
> * Hold IPv4 reassignments/reallocations totaling a /22 or less (to
> include zero)
>
> In no case shall an ISP receive more than a /16 initial allocation.
>
> Add 6.5.2(g) as follows:
>
> g. An LIR that requests a smaller /36 or /40 allocation is entitled to
> expand the allocation to any nibble aligned size up to /32 at any time
> without renumbering or additional justification. /40 allocations shall
> be automatically upgraded to /36 if at any time said LIR's IPv4 direct
> allocations exceed a /24. Expansions up to and including a /32 are not
> considered subsequent allocations, however any expansions beyond /32 are
> considered subsequent allocations and must conform to section 6.5.3.
> Downgrades of any IPv6 allocation to less than a /36 are not permitted
> regardless of the ISP's current or former IPv4 number resource holdings.
>
> Comments:
>
> The intent of this policy proposal is to make IPv6 adoption at the very
> bottom end expense-neutral for the ISP and revenue-neutral for ARIN. The
> author looks forward to a future era wherein IPv6 is the dominant
> technology and IPv4 is well in decline and considered optional leading
> the Community to conclude that sunsetting this policy is prudent in the
> interests of avoiding an incentive to request undersized IPv6 allocations.
>
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-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:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-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:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list