[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3: IPv6 Nano-allocations

John Sweeting jsweeting at arin.net
Tue Apr 14 17:29:29 EDT 2020


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:


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:
    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:
    Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
    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 
      * 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.
    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
    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:
    Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list