Draft Policy 2010-8: Rework of IPv6 assignment criteria - revised

[Member Services]

Draft Policy 2010-8
Rework of IPv6 assignment criteria

2010-8 has been revised.

"The Change made since the last version that went to PPML are;

1. Section 6.5.8.4 was removed and the current Community Networks policy
was moved as-is from 6.5.9 to 6.5.10.  This move is necessary to make
room for section 6.5.9 Subsequent assignments from this policy to
immediately follow section 6.5.8. Initial assignments.

2. A number of small editorial changes and grammatical corrections."

This draft policy is open for discussion on this mailing list and will
be on the agenda at the upcoming ARIN Public Policy Meeting in Toronto.

Draft Policy 2010-8 is below and can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2010_8.html

Regards,

Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)


## * ##


Draft Policy 2010-8
Rework of IPv6 assignment criteria

Version/Date: 5 April 2010

Policy statement:

6.5.8. Initial assignments

6.5.8.1. Initial assignment size

Organizations that meet at least one of the following criteria are
eligible to receive a minimum assignment of /48. Requests for larger
initial assignments, reasonably justified with supporting documentation,
will be evaluated based on the number of sites and the number of subnets
needed to support a site.

Organizations may request up to a /48 for each site in their network,
with the overall allocation rounded up to the next whole prefix only as
necessary. A subnet plan demonstrating a utilization of 33,689 or more
subnets within a site is necessary to justify an additional /48 for any
individual site, beyond this the 0.94 HD-Ratio metric of the number of
subnets is used.

All assignments shall be made from distinctly identified prefixes, with
each assignment receiving a reservation for growth of at least a /44.
Such reservations are not guaranteed and ARIN, at its discretion, may
assign them to other organizations at any time.

Note: Organizations with multiple sites are encouraged to consider the
use of /56s for smaller satellite sites.

6.5.8.2. Criteria for initial assignment to Internet connected end-users

Organizations may justify an initial assignment for connecting their own
network to the IPv6 Internet, with an intent to provide global
reachability for the assignment within 12 months, and for addressing
devices directly attached to their network infrastructure, by meeting
one of the following additional criteria:

a. Having a previously justified IPv4 end-user assignment from ARIN or
one of its predecessor registries, or;

b. Currently being IPv6 Multihomed or immediately becoming IPv6
Multihomed and using an assigned valid global AS number, or;

c. By providing a reasonable technical justification indicating why
other IPv6 addresses from an ISP or other LIR are unsuitable and a plan
detailing the utilization of sites and subnets for one, two and five
year periods.

Examples of justifications for why addresses from an ISP or other LIR
may be unsuitable include, but are not limited to:

     * An organization that operates infrastructure critical to life
safety or the functioning of society, has justification based on the
fact that renumbering would have a broader than expected impact than
simply the number of hosts involved. These would include; hospitals,
fire fighting, police, emergency response, power or energy distribution,
water or waste treatment, traffic management and control, etc…
     * Regardless of the number of hosts involved, an organization has
justification if renumbering would affect 1000 or more individuals
either internal or external to the organization.

6.5.8.3 Criteria for initial assignment to non-connected networks

Organizations may justify an initial assignment for operating their own
non-connected IPv6 network and for addressing devices directly attached
to their network infrastructure, by meeting one of the following
additional criteria:

a. Having a previously justified IPv4 end-users assignment from ARIN or
one of its predecessor registries, or;

b. By providing a reasonable technical justification indicating why an
assignment for a non-connected networks is necessary, including the
intended purpose for the assignment, and describing the network
infrastructure the assignment will be used to support. Justification
must include why Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses (ULA) is unsuitable
and a plan detailing the utilization of sites and subnets for one, two
and five year periods.

Examples of justifications for why ULA may be unsuitable include, but
are not limited to:

     * The need for authoritative delegation of reverse DNS, including
documentation why this is necessary.
     * The need for documented uniqueness, beyond the statistical
uniqueness provided by ULA, including documentation why this is necessary.
     * A documented need to connect with other networks connected to or
not connected to the Internet

NOTE: Organizations are encouraged to consider the use of ULA, for
non-connected networks, see RFC 4193 for details.

6.5.9. Subsequent assignments

Subsequent assignments may be made when the need for additional sites or
subnets are justified with reasonable supporting documentation. When
possible, subsequent assignments will be made from an adjacent address
block.

Organizations may request up to a /48 for each site in their network,
with the overall allocation rounded up to the next whole prefix only as
necessary. A subnet plan demonstrating a utilization of 33,689 or more
subnets within a site is necessary to justify an additional /48 for any
individual site, beyond this the 0.94 HD-Ratio metric of the number of
subnets is used.

Note: Organizations with multiple sites are encouraged to consider the
use of /56s for smaller satellite sites.

Move current 6.5.9 Community Network Assignments as-is to section 6.5.10.

Rationale:

This proposal provides a complete rework of the IPv6 end-user assignment
criteria, removing the dependency on IPv4 policy, while maintaining many
of the basic concepts contained in the current policies. The order of
the subsections of 6.5.8 was rearranged moving the initial assignment
size to 6.5.8.1 and subsequent assignments to 6.5.9. This will
facilitate adding future criteria without additional renumbering of
current policies.

The initial assignment criteria include the following general concepts:

     * When Internet connectivity is use to justify resources it is
implied the resources should be advertised to the Internet, within some
reasonable time frame after they are received.
     * Previously justified IPv4 resources may be used to justify the
need for IPv6 resources.
     * Internet multihoming is sufficient justification for an end-user
assignment in and of itself.
     * Other Internet connected end-users must justify why an ISP or LIR
assignment is not sufficient for their needs.
     * Non-connected networks must describe the purpose and network
infrastructure the assignment will be supporting, including why ULA is
not sufficient for their needs.
     * Organizations with multiple sites are allowed to request a /48
for each site, with a suggestion to use /56s for smaller sites.
     * While HD-Ratio is not completely eliminated it really only
applies to situations that an individual site of an organization needs
more that a /48.

Timetable for implementation: Immediate