Based on feedback and off-line discussion over the past few weeks I have=20
made a number of updates to 2010-8;
These include:
- Changing from HD-Ratio to a 75% utilization threshold
- Major rewrites of the initial assignment size and subsequent=20
assignment size sections
- Associated updates to the Rationale
---------------
1. Policy Proposal Name: Rework of IPv6 assignment criteria
2. Proposal Originator
name: David Farmer
email: farmer at umn.edu
telephone: 612-812-9952
organization: University of Minnesota
3. Proposal Version: 6.0
4. Date: 9/14/2010
5. Proposal type: modify
new, modify, or delete.
6. Policy term: Permanent
temporary, permanent, or renewable.
7. Policy statement:
Replace section 6.5.8 as follows;
6.5.8. Direct assignments from ARIN to end-user organizations
6.5.8.1 Initial Assignment Criteria
Organizations may justify an initial assignment for addressing devices=20
directly attached to their own network infrastructure, with an intent=20
for the addresses to begin operational use within 12 months, by meeting=20
one of the following criteria:
a. Having a previously justified IPv4 end-user assignment from ARIN or=20
one of its predecessor registries, or;
b. Currently being IPv6 Multihomed or immediately becoming IPv6=20
Multihomed and using an assigned valid global AS number, or;
c. By having a network consisting of a total of 1000 or more hosts, or;
d. By providing a reasonable technical justification indicating why IPv6=20
addresses from an ISP or other LIR are unsuitable.
Examples of justifications for why addresses from an ISP or other LIR=20
may be unsuitable include, but are not limited to:
=95 An organization that operates infrastructure critical to life safety=20
or the functioning of society can justify the need for an assignment=20
based on the fact that renumbering would have a broader than expected=20
impact than simply the number of hosts directly involved. These would=20
include: hospitals, fire fighting, police, emergency response, power or=20
energy distribution, water or waste treatment, traffic management and=20
control, etc=85
=95 Regardless of the number of hosts directly involved, an organization=20
can justify the need for an assignment if renumbering would affect 1000=20
or more individuals either internal or external to the organization.
=95 An organization with a network not connected to the Internet can=20
justify the need for an assignment by documenting a need for guaranteed=20
uniqueness, beyond the statistical uniqueness provided by ULA (see RFC=20
4193).
=95 An organization with a network not connected to the Internet, such as=
=20
a VPN overlay network, can justify the need for an assignment if they=20
require authoritative delegation of reverse DNS.
6.5.8.2 Initial assignment size
Organizations that meet at least one of the initial assignment criteria=20
above are eligible to receive an initial assignment of /48. Requests for=20
larger initial assignments, reasonably justified with supporting=20
documentation, will be evaluated based on the number of sites in an=20
organization=92s network and the number of subnets needed to support any=20
extra-large sites defined below.
6.5.8.2.1 /48 per site
An organization may request up to a /48 for each site in its network,=20
including any sites that will be operational within 12 months. Where a=20
site is a discrete location that is part of an organization=92s network.=20
In the case of a multi-tenant building, each organization located at the=20
site may separately justify a /48 for its network at the site.
A campus with multiple buildings may be considered as one or multiple=20
sites, based on the implementation of its network infrastructure. For a=20
campus to be considered as multiple sites, reasonable technical=20
documentation must be submitted describing how the network=20
infrastructure is implemented in a manner equivalent to multiple sites.
6.5.8.2.2 Extra-large site
In rare cases, an organization may request more than a /48 for an=20
extra-large site which requires more than 16,384 /64 subnets. In such a=20
case, a detailed subnet plan must be submitted for each extra-large site=20
in an organization=92s network. An extra-large site will receive the=20
smallest prefix such that the total subnet utilization justified does=20
not exceed 25%. Each extra-large site will be counted as an equivalent=20
number of /48 sites.
6.5.8.2.3 Larger initial assignments
Larger initial assignments will be determined based on the number of=20
sites justified above, aligned on a nibble boundary using the following=20
table:
More than 1 but less than or equal to 12 sites justified, receives a /44=20
assignment;
More than 12 but less than or equal to 192 /sites justified, receives a=20
/40 assignment;
More than 192 but less than or equal to 3,072 sites justified, receives=20
a /36 assignment;
More than 3,072 sites justified, receives a /32 assignment or larger.
In cases where more than 3,072 sites are justified, an assignment of the=20
smallest prefix, aligned on a nibble boundary, will be made such that=20
the total utilization based on the number of sites justified above does=20
not exceed 75%.
6.5.8.3 Subsequent assignments
Requests for subsequent assignments with supporting documentation will=20
be evaluated based on the same criteria as an initial assignment under=20
6.5.8.2 with the following modifications:
a. A subsequent assignment is justified when the total utilization based=20
on the number of sites justified exceeds 75% across all of an=20
organization=92s assignments. Except, if the organization received an=20
assignment per section 6.11 IPv6 Multiple Discrete Networks, such=20
assignments will be evaluated as if it were to a separate organization.
Organizations may have multiple separate assignments that should be=20
considered in total, due to previous subsequent assignments made per=20
clause 6.5.8.3.c below, or through Mergers and Acquisitions in section 8.2.
b. When possible subsequent assignments will result it the expansion of=20
an existing assignment by one or more nibble boundaries as justified.
c. If it is not possible to expand an existing assignment, or to expand=20
it adequately to meet the justified need, then a separate new assignment=20
will be made of a size as justified.
6.5.8.4 Consolidation and return of separate assignments
Organizations with multiple separate assignments should consolidate into=20
a single aggregate, if feasible. If an organization stops using one or=20
more of its separate assignments, any unused assignments must be=20
returned to ARIN.
Rationale:
This proposal provides a complete rework of the IPv6 end-user assignment=20
criteria, removing the dependency on IPv4 policy, providing clear=20
guidance in requesting larger initial assignments, and eliminating=20
HD-Ratio as criteria for evaluating end-user assignments.
The HD-Ratio is replaced with a simplified 75% utilization threshold=20
based on nibble boundaries for end-user assignments. This threshold is=20
somewhat more restrictive for larger assignments, while slightly less=20
restrictive for the smaller /44 assignments, than the HD-Ratio.=20
However, in both cases it is much easier for an end-user to understand=20
the policy criteria that applies to them.
The following general concepts are included:
=95 Previously justified IPv4 resources may be used to justify the need=20
for IPv6 resources
=95 Internet multihoming is sufficient justification for an IPv6 end-user=
=20
assignment in and of itself
=95 Networks with more than 1000 hosts have a justified need for IPv6=20
resources; as is the case in current policy, it is just more clearly=20
stated without relying on a reference to, and the consequences of, IPv4=20
policy
=95 Other end-users must justify why an ISP or LIR assignment is not=20
sufficient for their needs
=95 Organizations with multiple sites may receive a /48 for each site in=20
their network
=95 A campus with multiple buildings may be considered as one or multiple=
=20
sites, based on the implementation of its network infrastructure
=95 Reservations are no longer necessary as ARIN has committed to sparse=20
assignment for IPv6
=95 Providing sufficiently large initial assignments based on nibble=20
boundaries along with sparse assignments will reduce route table growth=20
caused solely by subsequent assignments
The 25% subnet utilization for an extra-large site is proposed as the=20
threshold for a larger prefix in order to allow an extra-large site=20
enough room to create an organized subnet plan. Requiring denser usage=20
would make it almost impossible for an extra-large site to maintain any=20
kind of organized subnet plan. Furthermore, even at 25% utilization,=20
more than 16,384 subnets are required to justify more than a /48 for a=20
site. Few, if any, sites can actually meet or exceed this threshold.
The ARIN Board of Trusties should consider incentives that provide=20
additional motivation for end-users to consolidate into a single=20
aggregate per section 6.5.8.4 of this policy.
Timetable for implementation: Immediate
--=20
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
David Farmer Email:farmer@umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota=09
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info@arin.net if you experience any issues.
Originally sent: Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 02:52:58 -0500
Re-queued by ESC7NET: Mon Sep 20 23:39:24 2010