Re: Agendas for IPv6/lir/eix joint sessions RIPE40
- Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 19:54:28 +0900
Hi,
>D. New IPv6 Address Policy Proposal
> Gerard Ross (APNIC)
> Takashi Arano (JPNIC/Asia Global Crossing)
Here is another IPv6 address policy proposal which
reached consensus in AP regions.
I am sorry for late submission.
Regards,
Takashi Arano
----------------------------------
New Draft Proposal of IPv6 Address Policy
- Consensus reached in the APNIC Open Policy meeting in Taipei
27/9/2001
Gerard Ross(APNIC)
Takashi Arano(JPNIC/Asia Global Crossing)
1. Background of this proposal
This document is a draft proposal for IPv6 Address allocation/assignment
policy, based on the discussion results in the last APNIC Open Policy
Meeting in August 2001 at Taipei. At that meeting, two proposals for IPv6 address
policy were presented.
One is RIRs (APNIC)'s proposal by compiling RIPE/ARIN mailing list discussion and
the other is a proposal based on the consensus among Japanese IP community
such as JANOG, WIDE, etc. presented by JPNIC.
After some discussion there, two proposals were merged and
the merged version got some consensus among meeting participants.
2. Basic principles
Any IPv6 policy should follow the basic idea of traditional IPv4 address policy
such as slow start, concept of address lease, etc.
The policy has 5 goals which are mutually conflicted and should be well balanced;
Uniqueness
Registration
Aggregation
Conservation and
Fairness.
Main difference in IPv6 is
- Lower priority on conservation and
- Higher priority on aggregation
3. Initial Allocation Criteria
justification of /36
At HD-Ratio 0.8 (18.9% of /36), this is 776 sites.
4. Initial Allocation Size
Shorter prefix of either
evaluation of existing IPv4 infrastructure or
the fixed size /32 (i.e. /32 is the minimum allocation size)
This means an applicant who has large IPv4 infrastructure can be allocated
more than /32 with some justifications.
This can avoid unnecessary address fragmentation.
Note that the number /32 was supported by almost all meeting participants
according to the show of hands.
5. Subsequent Allocation Criteria
Subsequent allocation requested when HD-Ratio utilization level is reached.
The value of HD-Ratio should be between 0.8 and 0.85.
But in the meeting, we have no clear consensus on this number
and need to investigate more.
6. Nth Subsequent Allocation Size
Shorter prefix of either
previous (n-1)th allocation size minus 1 or
evaluation of two year requirements submitted.
This means organizations satisfying the HD-Ratio criteria can obtain
at least one bit shorter prefix. If they need more, they can
demonstrate their requirements. In this case, RIRs evaluate their
requirements and allocate prefixes enough to satisfy two year requirements.
7. Allocation: LIR to ISP
LIR can decide the allocation criteria and size for their customer
ISP, but they must report sum of all /48s to RIR when they come back
to RIR for subsequent allocation in evaluation of normal HD-ratio.
8. Assignment to end user
LIR assigns /48(in most cases), /64 or /128 to end users, depending
on situations. However, RIR/NIR must not concern what
size LIR assigns to them because it is within IETF's boundary.
If end users use up /48 and need more, they can request an additional
/48 with justification. This request will be processed in the RIR/NIR
level.
9. Definition of 'site'
The HD-Ratio is measured by the number of 'sites' with /48 address.
A 'site' is identified as ISP-connection basis, i.e. every end user can
get a /48 when they get an IPv6 connection from ISP, regardless of
organization, location, etc.
10. Assignment to infrastructure
ISPs can assign up to /48 per their PoP(regarded as just one assignment).
11. DB registration
Every site (/48 address prefix) should be registered.
Privacy concern should be covered.
------------------------------------------
|