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. ------------------------------------------