[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment

[Member Services]

 > The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the
 > names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML.

The ARIN Advisory Council shepherds are Owen DeLong and Matt Pounsett.

Regards,

Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)


Member Services wrote:
> ARIN received the following policy proposal. In accordance with the ARIN
> Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, the proposal is being
> posted to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and being placed on
> ARIN's website.
> 
> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review this proposal at their next
> regularly scheduled meeting. The AC may decide to:
> 
>       1. Accept the proposal as written. If the AC accepts the proposal,
> it will be posted as a formal policy proposal to PPML and it will be
> presented at a Public Policy Meeting.
> 
>       2. Postpone their decision regarding the proposal until the next
> regularly scheduled AC meeting in order to work with the author. The AC
> will work with the author to clarify, combine or divide the proposal. At
> their following meeting the AC will accept or not accept the proposal.
> 
>       3. Not accept the proposal. If the AC does not accept the proposal,
> the AC will explain their decision via the PPML. If a proposal is not
> accepted, then the author may elect to use the petition process to
> advance their proposal. If the author elects not to petition or the
> petition fails, then the proposal will be closed.
> 
> The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the
> names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML.
> 
> In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on this proposal on
> the PPML, particularly their support or non-support and the reasoning
> behind their opinion. Such participation contributes to a thorough
> vetting and provides important guidance to the AC in their deliberations.
> 
> The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at:
> http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html
> 
> Mailing list subscription information can be found at:
> http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Member Services
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> 
> 
> ## * ##
> 
> 
> Policy Proposal Name: Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment
> 
> Author: Alain Durand
> 
> Proposal Version: 1.0
> 
> Submission Date: 6/6/2008
> 
> Proposal type: New
> 
> Policy term: Permanent
> 
> Policy statement:
> 
> When ARIN receives its last /8 IPv4 allocation from IANA, a contiguous
> /10 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 size allocation of /28 and a
> maximum size allocation of /24. ARIN should use sparse allocation when
> possible within that /10 block.
> 
> In order to receive an allocation or assignment under this policy:
> 
> 1) the applicant may not have received resources under this policy in
> the preceding six months;
> 
> 2) previous allocations/assignments under this policy must continue to
> meet the justification requirements of this policy;
> 
> 3) previous allocations/assignments under this policy must meet the
> utilization requirements of end user assignments;
> 
> 4) the applicant must demonstrate that no other allocations or
> assignments will meet this need;
> 
> 5) on subsequent allocation under this policy, ARIN staff may require
> applicants to renumber out of previously allocated / assigned space
> under this policy in order to minimize non-contiguous allocations;
> 
> 6) recipient organizations must be members in good standing of ARIN.
> 
> 
> Rationale:
> 
> Rationale for reserving IPv4 space:
> 
> This policy provides predictability on how the end game of IPv4 is going
> to be played after IANA completion. It will facilitate IPv6 deployment
> by ensuring that some small chunks of IPv4 space will remain available
> for a long time to ease the co-existence of IPv4 & IPv6.
> 
> Rationale for reserving a contiguous /10
> 
> This is a balance between setting aside too much space and not having
> enough to facilitate IPv6 deployment for many years. Out of the last /8,
> that would leave the equivalent of 3 /10 to ARIN either for business as
> usual or for other policies in the spirit of this one.
> 
> A /10 represents 4,194,304 IP addresses, If all of them were to be used
> in NAT-PT or NAT464 type devices with a consolidation factor of 100
> users behind each IP address, that would represent about 400 million users.
> 
> Most networks today filter IPv4 announcements more specific than /24.
> This policy creates allocations & assignment prefixes as long as /28.
> Allocating out of a contiguous block will mitigate the impact of this
> policy on filter lists.
> 
> Rationale for minimum size allocation of /28
> 
> This minimum size allocation will put a cap at 250k additional entries
> in the global IPv4 routing table.
> 
> Rationale for maximum size allocation of /24 and for the 6 month delay
> between allocations
> 
> This maximum allocation size coupled with the requirement of a 6 months
> delay between allocations will prevent hoarding and make sure this pool
> will last several years.
> 
> Rationale for forced renumbering for further allocation
> 
> The minimum allocation size of /28 may create a huge increase in the
> IPv4 routing table size. Forcing renumbering for subsequent allocations
> under this policy will somehow limit the growth of the routing table
> size by enabling the announcement of aggregated space. It is expected
> that the savings in routing table entries will outweigh the pain of
> forced renumbering.
> 
> However, renumbering is never an easy task, so it should only be
> considered as last resort. it is expected that sparse allocation
> techniques will prevent the need of force renumbering for a fairly long
> time.
> 
> Note: This policy proposal hints that the /10 should come out of the
> last /8 received by ARIN from IANA. However, it does not say so
> explicitly, leaving the final decision up to the ARIN staff.
> 
> 
> Timetable for implementation:
> 
> As soon as ARIN gets its last /8 allocation from IANA.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>