[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2: /26 initial IPv4 allocation for IXPs

[Andrew Dul]

Indeed, we therefore have to define priorities of allocations for the 
depleted IPv4 pool.

I wanted to point out that if the community believed that sticking with 
the /24 allocations is best for IXPs then it appears we have sufficient 
resources to do so into the future.  At the present time the policy 
states that IXP (4.4) allocations have a higher priority than a generic 
wait-list request.  The community created this priority believing that 
IXPs are critical infrastructure that require these resources.

Andrew

On 6/20/2023 10:53 AM, Chris Woodfield wrote:
> Andrew - You are correct that the micro-allocation pool can be 
> replenished as needed from returned allocations. That said, it should 
> be noted that IPv4 allocations used for this purpose would be 
> resources that, under current policy, would have presumably been 
> allocated to organizations via the wait list otherwise.
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Chris
>
>
>> On Jun 20, 2023, at 10:42, Andrew Dul <andrew.dul at quark.net> wrote:
>>
>> I'd also like to point out that we already have a method for 
>> refilling the IXP pool as needed.  The current policy states that 
>> ARIN should maintain at least a 3 year supply for these reserved 
>> pools and so far it would also seem that the returns to ARIN appear 
>> to be sufficient to add to the reserved pools as necessary.
>>
>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/#4-1-7-2-precedence-for-replenishment 
>>
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>> On 6/20/2023 10:10 AM, Chris Woodfield wrote:
>>> Speaking as the proposal author: It appears that a URL included in the draft language has been inadvertently eaten by formatting. The Statistics & Reporting link is here:https://www.arin.net/reference/research/statistics/#ipv4-reserved-pool-status-nrpm-4-10-ipv6-deployments
>>>
>>> I’ll also note that this page appears to have been updated since the policy was originally submitted - it now appears that the NPRM 4.4 Micro-Allocation pool is 65% allocated, with 35% remaining. (There’s a good chance I was rounding down when I said 50% in the problem statement)
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -Chris
>>>
>>>> On Jun 20, 2023, at 08:54, ARIN<info at arin.net>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 15 June 2023, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted “ARIN-prop-320: /26 initial IPv4 allocation for IXPs” as a Draft Policy.
>>>>   
>>>> Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2 is below and can be found at:
>>>>   
>>>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2023_2
>>>>   
>>>> You are encouraged to discuss all Draft Policies on PPML. The AC will evaluate the discussion 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,
>>>>   
>>>> Eddie Diego
>>>> Policy Analyst
>>>> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2: /26 initial IPv4 allocation for IXPs
>>>>
>>>> Problem Statement:
>>>>
>>>> Per NRPM Section 4.4, ARIN has reserved a /15 for micro-allocations for critical internet infrastructure, such as internet exchange points (IXPs) and core DNS service providers. The majority of these allocation requests are made by IXPs. As of the last ARIN report, roughly half of this reservation is allocated (see Statistics & Reporting  Projections from ARIN staff suggest that at current allocation rates, the remaining reserved space may be exhausted in the next few years.
>>>>
>>>> In parallel, an analysis of PeeringDB data conducted by the RIPE Address Policy Working Group shows that approximately 70% of global IXPs have fewer than 32 members registered with that site. An IXP this size could readily operate with a /26 allocation, which would provide 100% overprovisioning beyond their existing peer count. (Source:https://github.com/mwichtlh/address-policy-wg  )
>>>>
>>>> Unlike other types of allocations, IXP peering networks are not required by member networks to be globally reachable; only members of the IXP must be able to reach the prefix. As such, there is no technical requirement that an IXP allocation must be no smaller than a /24.
>>>>
>>>> Policy statement:
>>>>
>>>> Existing text:
>>>>
>>>> 4.4. Micro-allocation
>>>>
>>>> ARIN will make IPv4 micro-allocations to critical infrastructure providers of the Internet, including public exchange points, core DNS service providers (e.g. ICANN-sanctioned root and ccTLD operators) as well as the RIRs and IANA. These allocations will be no smaller than a /24. Multiple allocations may be granted in certain situations.
>>>>
>>>> Replace with:
>>>>
>>>> 4.4 Micro-allocation
>>>>
>>>> ARIN will make IPv4 micro-allocations to critical infrastructure providers of the Internet, including public internet exchange points (IXPs), core DNS service providers (e.g. ICANN-sanctioned root and ccTLD operators) as well as the RIRs and IANA. These allocations will be no smaller than a /26 for IXPs, or a /24 for other allocations that require global reachability of the assigned allocation. Multiple allocations may be granted in certain situations.
>>>>
>>>> 4.4.1 Micro-allocations for Internet Exchange Points (IXPs)
>>>>
>>>> An IXP requesting an initial IPv4 allocation from this reserved space will be assigned a /26 by default. An IXP requesting an allocation larger than a /26 must show an immediate need to utilize more than 25% of the requested allocation size upon initial commissioning.
>>>>
>>>> An IXP requesting an allocation under this section must have also requested, or already received, an IPv6 allocation for the same purpose under Section 6.10.1.
>>>>
>>>> An allocation made to an IXP under this section may only be used for the operation of its public peering LAN. No other uses are allowed.
>>>>
>>>> An IXP that has received an IPv4 allocation under this section may request a larger allocation once they have utilized more than 50% of their existing one. Upon receiving the larger allocation, the IXP must migrate to the new allocation and return their previous one to ARIN within 6 months.
>>>>
>>>> Comments:
>>>>
>>>> This proposal mirrors RIPE policy proposal 2023-01 (seehttps://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2023-01) which is currently under consideration in that region and appears to have sufficient community support for adoption at the time of this writing.
>>>>
>>>> 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 contactinfo 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 contactinfo 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.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20230620/a1aee8fe/attachment.htm>