Keyboard Shortcuts
Thread View
j: Next unread messagek: Previous unread messagej a: Jump to all threadsj l: Jump to MailingList overview
Submitters Names: Randy Bush, IIJ, Geoff Huston, APNIC
SIG: Policy
Title: End Site Allocation policy for IPv6
Introduction:
This policy proposal proposes to amend the APNIC IPv6 address allocation policies regarding the definition of the default size of End Site assignments, and specify the calculation of address utilization efficiency relating to subsequent allocation criteria.
Rationale:
The current IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy (APNIC-089) indicates that end sites should be allocated a /48 as a uniform allocation states unit.
This proposal alters the existing policy regarding LIR and ISP assignments to End Sites to allow the unit of assignment to be an LIR or ISP decision.
In assessing the address utilization efficiency for ISPs or LIRs, the definition of an End Site for the purposes of the calculation of ISP or LIR End Site allocation efficiency is to be made according to a /56 size.
For the purpose of evaluating LIR and End Site IPv6 IP address allocation efficiency using the HD ratio, the starting bit position used in the calculation is to be bit position 56.
This measure, if undertaken generally by all RIRs, and assuming that further measures are undertaken by the addressing community regarding the HD ratio to a larger value, would increase the anticipated useful lifetime of IPv6 to encompass a period in excess of 100 years during which period no further allocation policy changes would be anticipated to encompass a relatively encompassing diversity of future IPv6 deployment scenarios.
A more detailed rationale is available in Geoff Huston's presentation on the subject, at RIPE 50, which can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-50/presentations/ripe50-plenary-wed-i...
Situation in other RIRs:
A comparable policy proposal as been submitted to RIPE and ARIN
Details:
End User Allocations:
End Users are assigned an End Site assignment from their LIR or ISP. The size of the assignment is a local decision for the LIR or ISP to make, using a minimum value of a /64 (only one subnet is anticipated for the End Site).
ISPs and LIRs:
ISPs and LIRs may chose whether to make changes to their procedures for assigning address blocks to End Sites. The threshold End Site allocation efficiency level is between 20% to 50% for most ISPs and LIRs when based on a 0.94 HD Ratio.
APNIC:
APNIC will amend its IPv6 allocation criteria to reflect the use of an HD ratio with the size calculation starting at bit position 56 as the unitary metric in the calculation of the ISP or LIR's end site allocation efficiency.
Appendix - References
This material is not formally part of the Policy Proposal. It is included here for informational purposes.
1. The IPv6 Address Plan - Geoff Huston http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2005-07/ipv6size.html
2. Internet Draft: Issues Related to the Management of IPv6 Address Space - Thomas Narten http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ipv6/draft-narten-iana-rir-ipv6-considerations-00.t...
3. Internet Draft: IPv6 Address Allocation to End Sites - Thomas Narten, Geoff Huston & Lea Roberts http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-48boundary-00....
Geoff and Randy,
Thanks for submitting this policy proposal.
To aid discussions we have given it proposal reference prop-033-v001. A webpage at http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/proposals/prop-033- v001.html also tracks the status of the proposal.
This proposal is now in it's first discussion phase in this mailing list and I invite subscribers to comment as we gear towards the next APNIC 22 Open Policy meeting.
regards, Save
-- Savenaca Vocea, Policy Development Manager, save@apnic.net Asia Pacific Network Information Centre http://www.apnic.net ph/fx +61 7 3858 3100/99
On 18/03/2006, at 4:52 AM, Geoff Huston wrote:
Submitters Names: Randy Bush, IIJ, Geoff Huston, APNIC
SIG: Policy
Title: End Site Allocation policy for IPv6
Introduction:
This policy proposal proposes to amend the APNIC IPv6 address allocation policies regarding the definition of the default size of End Site assignments, and specify the calculation of address utilization efficiency relating to subsequent allocation criteria.
Rationale:
The current IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy (APNIC-089) indicates that end sites should be allocated a /48 as a uniform allocation states unit.
This proposal alters the existing policy regarding LIR and ISP assignments to End Sites to allow the unit of assignment to be an LIR or ISP decision.
In assessing the address utilization efficiency for ISPs or LIRs, the definition of an End Site for the purposes of the calculation of ISP or LIR End Site allocation efficiency is to be made according to a /56 size.
For the purpose of evaluating LIR and End Site IPv6 IP address allocation efficiency using the HD ratio, the starting bit position used in the calculation is to be bit position 56.
This measure, if undertaken generally by all RIRs, and assuming that further measures are undertaken by the addressing community regarding the HD ratio to a larger value, would increase the anticipated useful lifetime of IPv6 to encompass a period in excess of 100 years during which period no further allocation policy changes would be anticipated to encompass a relatively encompassing diversity of future IPv6 deployment scenarios.
A more detailed rationale is available in Geoff Huston's presentation on the subject, at RIPE 50, which can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-50/presentations/ripe50- plenary-wed-ipv6-roundtable-report.pdf
Situation in other RIRs:
A comparable policy proposal as been submitted to RIPE and ARIN
Details:
End User Allocations:
End Users are assigned an End Site assignment from their LIR or ISP. The size of the assignment is a local decision for the LIR or ISP to make, using a minimum value of a /64 (only one subnet is anticipated for the End Site).
ISPs and LIRs:
ISPs and LIRs may chose whether to make changes to their procedures for assigning address blocks to End Sites. The threshold End Site allocation efficiency level is between 20% to 50% for most ISPs and LIRs when based on a 0.94 HD Ratio.
APNIC:
APNIC will amend its IPv6 allocation criteria to reflect the use of an HD ratio with the size calculation starting at bit position 56 as the unitary metric in the calculation of the ISP or LIR's end site allocation efficiency.
Appendix - References
This material is not formally part of the Policy Proposal. It is included here for informational purposes.
- The IPv6 Address Plan - Geoff Huston
http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2005-07/ipv6size.html
- Internet Draft: Issues Related to the Management of IPv6 Address
Space - Thomas Narten http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ipv6/draft-narten-iana-rir-ipv6- considerations-00.txt
- Internet Draft: IPv6 Address Allocation to End Sites - Thomas
Narten, Geoff Huston & Lea Roberts http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-narten- ipv6-3177bis-48boundary-00.txt
Hi, I've introduced prop-033-v001 to our community and received quite a few comments from our members.
Since it is a little long, I've arranged them in ppt slides:
http://www.apnic.net/meetings/22/docs/policy-pres-okutani-v6-assignment-jp.p...
May I request for a few minutes of time at the Policy SIG session to present them?
Izumi
Save Vocea wrote:
Geoff and Randy,
Thanks for submitting this policy proposal.
To aid discussions we have given it proposal reference prop-033-v001. A webpage at http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/proposals/prop-033-v001.html also tracks the status of the proposal.
This proposal is now in it's first discussion phase in this mailing list and I invite subscribers to comment as we gear towards the next APNIC 22 Open Policy meeting.
regards, Save
-- Savenaca Vocea, Policy Development Manager, save@apnic.net Asia Pacific Network Information Centre http://www.apnic.net ph/fx +61 7 3858 3100/99
On 18/03/2006, at 4:52 AM, Geoff Huston wrote:
Submitters Names: Randy Bush, IIJ, Geoff Huston, APNIC
SIG: Policy
Title: End Site Allocation policy for IPv6
Introduction:
This policy proposal proposes to amend the APNIC IPv6 address allocation policies regarding the definition of the default size of End Site assignments, and specify the calculation of address utilization efficiency relating to subsequent allocation criteria.
Rationale:
The current IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy (APNIC-089) indicates that end sites should be allocated a /48 as a uniform allocation states unit.
This proposal alters the existing policy regarding LIR and ISP assignments to End Sites to allow the unit of assignment to be an LIR or ISP decision.
In assessing the address utilization efficiency for ISPs or LIRs, the definition of an End Site for the purposes of the calculation of ISP or LIR End Site allocation efficiency is to be made according to a /56 size.
For the purpose of evaluating LIR and End Site IPv6 IP address allocation efficiency using the HD ratio, the starting bit position used in the calculation is to be bit position 56.
This measure, if undertaken generally by all RIRs, and assuming that further measures are undertaken by the addressing community regarding the HD ratio to a larger value, would increase the anticipated useful lifetime of IPv6 to encompass a period in excess of 100 years during which period no further allocation policy changes would be anticipated to encompass a relatively encompassing diversity of future IPv6 deployment scenarios.
A more detailed rationale is available in Geoff Huston's presentation on the subject, at RIPE 50, which can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-50/presentations/ripe50-plenary-wed-i...
Situation in other RIRs:
A comparable policy proposal as been submitted to RIPE and ARIN
Details:
End User Allocations:
End Users are assigned an End Site assignment from their LIR or ISP. The size of the assignment is a local decision for the LIR or ISP to make, using a minimum value of a /64 (only one subnet is anticipated for the End Site).
ISPs and LIRs:
ISPs and LIRs may chose whether to make changes to their procedures for assigning address blocks to End Sites. The threshold End Site allocation efficiency level is between 20% to 50% for most ISPs and LIRs when based on a 0.94 HD Ratio.
APNIC:
APNIC will amend its IPv6 allocation criteria to reflect the use of an HD ratio with the size calculation starting at bit position 56 as the unitary metric in the calculation of the ISP or LIR's end site allocation efficiency.
Appendix - References
This material is not formally part of the Policy Proposal. It is included here for informational purposes.
- The IPv6 Address Plan - Geoff Huston
http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2005-07/ipv6size.html
- Internet Draft: Issues Related to the Management of IPv6 Address
Space - Thomas Narten http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ipv6/draft-narten-iana-rir-ipv6-considerations-00.t...
- Internet Draft: IPv6 Address Allocation to End Sites - Thomas Narten,
Geoff Huston & Lea Roberts http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-48boundary-00....
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource managementpolicy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Hi, it's been a while since this proposal was submitted on the mailing list, but I have a question regarding its implications.
What is the extent of decisions left upto LIRs over the size of an assignment? I recall there were some discussions over creating guidelines(or recommendations) for LIRs in the ARIN region, and wondering how it will apply in our region.
This would probably affect people's position over the proposal, so I hope someone (Geoff or Randy?) could help me clarify this point.
Thanks, Izumi
Geoff Huston wrote:
Submitters Names: Randy Bush, IIJ, Geoff Huston, APNIC
SIG: Policy
Title: End Site Allocation policy for IPv6
Introduction:
This policy proposal proposes to amend the APNIC IPv6 address allocation policies regarding the definition of the default size of End Site assignments, and specify the calculation of address utilization efficiency relating to subsequent allocation criteria.
Rationale:
The current IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy (APNIC-089) indicates that end sites should be allocated a /48 as a uniform allocation states unit.
This proposal alters the existing policy regarding LIR and ISP assignments to End Sites to allow the unit of assignment to be an LIR or ISP decision.
In assessing the address utilization efficiency for ISPs or LIRs, the definition of an End Site for the purposes of the calculation of ISP or LIR End Site allocation efficiency is to be made according to a /56 size.
For the purpose of evaluating LIR and End Site IPv6 IP address allocation efficiency using the HD ratio, the starting bit position used in the calculation is to be bit position 56.
This measure, if undertaken generally by all RIRs, and assuming that further measures are undertaken by the addressing community regarding the HD ratio to a larger value, would increase the anticipated useful lifetime of IPv6 to encompass a period in excess of 100 years during which period no further allocation policy changes would be anticipated to encompass a relatively encompassing diversity of future IPv6 deployment scenarios.
A more detailed rationale is available in Geoff Huston's presentation on the subject, at RIPE 50, which can be found at: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-50/presentations/ripe50-plenary-wed-i...
Situation in other RIRs:
A comparable policy proposal as been submitted to RIPE and ARIN
Details:
End User Allocations:
End Users are assigned an End Site assignment from their LIR or ISP. The size of the assignment is a local decision for the LIR or ISP to make, using a minimum value of a /64 (only one subnet is anticipated for the End Site).
ISPs and LIRs:
ISPs and LIRs may chose whether to make changes to their procedures for assigning address blocks to End Sites. The threshold End Site allocation efficiency level is between 20% to 50% for most ISPs and LIRs when based on a 0.94 HD Ratio.
APNIC:
APNIC will amend its IPv6 allocation criteria to reflect the use of an HD ratio with the size calculation starting at bit position 56 as the unitary metric in the calculation of the ISP or LIR's end site allocation efficiency.
Appendix - References
This material is not formally part of the Policy Proposal. It is included here for informational purposes.
- The IPv6 Address Plan - Geoff Huston
http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2005-07/ipv6size.html
- Internet Draft: Issues Related to the Management of IPv6 Address Space -
Thomas Narten http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ipv6/draft-narten-iana-rir-ipv6-considerations-00.t...
- Internet Draft: IPv6 Address Allocation to End Sites - Thomas Narten,
Geoff Huston & Lea Roberts http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-48boundary-00....
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource managementpolicy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
What is the extent of decisions left upto LIRs over the size of an assignment? I recall there were some discussions over creating guidelines(or recommendations) for LIRs in the ARIN region, and wondering how it will apply in our region.
This would probably affect people's position over the proposal, so I hope someone (Geoff or Randy?) could help me clarify this point.
it would still be on an as justified basis. this is just removes the dependency of HD calc from actual allocation size.
randy
Randy Bush wrote:
What is the extent of decisions left upto LIRs over the size of an assignment? I recall there were some discussions over creating guidelines(or recommendations) for LIRs in the ARIN region, and wondering how it will apply in our region.
This would probably affect people's position over the proposal, so I hope someone (Geoff or Randy?) could help me clarify this point.
it would still be on an as justified basis. this is just removes the dependency of HD calc from actual allocation size.
Thanks Randy. It makes sense that the HD ratio calculation should be independent from the assignment size, but I'm not too sure what you mean by justified basis.
Is it left upto LIRs to assign any size they believe is adequate(either operationally or service wise), or are they expected to justify their assignments in some way?
One more question I have is whether this proposal removes the currently /48 boundary for requiring second opinion requests. It made sense when the standard assignment size was /48, but how would this apply in this proposal?
izumi
Thanks Randy. It makes sense that the HD ratio calculation should be independent from the assignment size, but I'm not too sure what you mean by justified basis.
that the lir would assign what is needed/justifiable. i.e. if the customer can justify a /42 they should assign a /42.
One more question I have is whether this proposal removes the currently /48 boundary for requiring second opinion requests.
oops! we are entering territory i do not know well. perhaps geoff or someone else should speak.
randy
Randy Bush wrote:
Thanks Randy. It makes sense that the HD ratio calculation should be independent from the assignment size, but I'm not too sure what you mean by justified basis.
that the lir would assign what is needed/justifiable. i.e. if the customer can justify a /42 they should assign a /42.
okay, so I suppose it would be similar to IPv4?
As you are probably aware, I have a feeling that this idea won't be so popular in JP. I'll introduce it in our policy meeting this Friday and share the feedbacks here.
One more question I have is whether this proposal removes the currently /48 boundary for requiring second opinion requests.
oops! we are entering territory i do not know well. perhaps geoff or someone else should speak.
:-) yes, someone had also pointed out to me that there are no second opinion requests in ARIN. In AP, LIRs are required to submit a second opinion request to APNIC hostmaster if they make assignments shorter than /48.
It may sound a little operational to discuss it here, but I'm pretty sure that I'd get these questions from LIRs in JP, so it would help if someone could answer this point for me.
Thanks, izumi
Izumi,
On 03/07/2006, at 1:28 PM, Izumi Okutani wrote:
One more question I have is whether this proposal removes the currently /48 boundary for requiring second opinion requests.
oops! we are entering territory i do not know well. perhaps geoff or someone else should speak.
:-) yes, someone had also pointed out to me that there are no second opinion requests in ARIN. In AP, LIRs are required to submit a second opinion request to APNIC hostmaster if they make assignments shorter than /48.
It may sound a little operational to discuss it here, but I'm pretty sure that I'd get these questions from LIRs in JP, so it would help if someone could answer this point for me.
The practice for second opinion request to APNIC for assignments shorter than /48 will remain as stated in the current policy.
Save
Okay, acknowleged that the policy for "5.4.2. Assignment of multiple /48s to a single end site" remain unchanged. Thanks Save.
izumi
Save Vocea wrote:
Izumi,
On 03/07/2006, at 1:28 PM, Izumi Okutani wrote:
One more question I have is whether this proposal removes the currently /48 boundary for requiring second opinion requests.
oops! we are entering territory i do not know well. perhaps geoff or someone else should speak.
:-) yes, someone had also pointed out to me that there are no second opinion requests in ARIN. In AP, LIRs are required to submit a second opinion request to APNIC hostmaster if they make assignments shorter than /48.
It may sound a little operational to discuss it here, but I'm pretty sure that I'd get these questions from LIRs in JP, so it would help if someone could answer this point for me.
The practice for second opinion request to APNIC for assignments shorter than /48 will remain as stated in the current policy.
Save
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource managementpolicy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
As you are probably aware, I have a feeling that this idea won't be so popular in JP.
wow! why. the goal was simple, to separate the prefix length by which HD is measured from actual assignment size. that is all. why could someone think this bad? i am very confused.
randy
Randy Bush wrote:
As you are probably aware, I have a feeling that this idea won't be so popular in JP.
wow! why. the goal was simple, to separate the prefix length by which HD is measured from actual assignment size. that is all. why could someone think this bad? i am very confused.
I'm getting confused here too :-).
I assumed this was the same proposal as what had been proposed at the ARIN last meeting in Montreal. Doesn't it imply to make assignments on justifiable basis by one bit?
izumi
As you are probably aware, I have a feeling that this idea won't be so popular in JP.
wow! why. the goal was simple, to separate the prefix length by which HD is measured from actual assignment size. that is all. why could someone think this bad? i am very confused.
I'm getting confused here too :-). I assumed this was the same proposal as what had been proposed at the ARIN last meeting in Montreal. Doesn't it imply to make assignments on justifiable basis by one bit?
s/imply/allow without affecting how hd is calculated/
randy
At 01:17 PM 3/07/2006, Randy Bush wrote:
Thanks Randy. It makes sense that the HD ratio calculation should be independent from the assignment size, but I'm not too sure what you mean by justified basis.
that the lir would assign what is needed/justifiable. i.e. if the customer can justify a /42 they should assign a /42.
One more question I have is whether this proposal removes the currently /48 boundary for requiring second opinion requests.
oops! we are entering territory i do not know well. perhaps geoff or someone else should speak.
same here - maybe Save can answer this question
Geoff
Activity Summary
- 6229 days inactive
- 6229 days old
- sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
- 4 participants
- 13 comments