|
Dear
SIG members An
updated version of the proposal 'Global policy for the allocation of the
remaining IPv4 address space' has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It
will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC The
proposal's history can be found at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-055-v002.html This
new version of the proposal includes an update on the proposal's status in
other RIRs. No other changes have been made. We
invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list before the
meeting. The
comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an important part
of the policy development process. We encourage you to express your views on
the proposal:
- Do you support or oppose this proposal?
- Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
tell the community about your situation.
- Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
- Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
- What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
effective? randy
and jian ________________________________________________________________________ prop-055-v002:
Global policy for the allocation of the remaining IPv4
address space ________________________________________________________________________ Authors:
Roque Gagliano, ANTEL
Francisco Obispo, CENIT
Haitham EL Nakhal, MCIT
Didier Allain Kla, ISOC Cote
JPNIC IPv4 countdown policy team
- Akinori Maemura
- Akira Nakagawa
- Izumi Okutani
- Kosuke Ito
- Kuniaki Kondo
- Shuji Nakamura
- Susumu Sato
- Takashi Arano
- Tomohiro Fujisaki
- Tomoya Yoshida
- Toshiyuki Hosaka Version:
2 Date:
22 July 2008 1.
Introduction ---------------- The
exhaustion of IPv4 address space is projected to take place within the next few
years. This proposal seeks to focus on measures that should be taken globally
in the address management area in order to prepare for the situation in all RIR
regions. 2.
Summary of current problem ------------------------------ To
continue applying a global coordinated policy for distribution of the last
piece(s) of each RIR's unallocated address block does not match the reality of
the situation in each RIR region. Issues
each RIR region will face during the exhaustion period vary by region as the
level of development of IPv4 and IPv6 are widely different. As a result,
applying a global co-ordinated policy may not adequately address issues in a
certain region while it could be work for the others. For
example, in a region where late comers desperately need even small blocks of
IPv4 addresses to access to the IPv4 Internet, a policy that defines the target
of allocations/assignments of IPv4 address space to be late comers would be
appropriate in such region. This would allow availablilty of IPv4 address space
for such requirements for more years. Another
example comes from difference in IPv6 deployment rate. For a region where IPv6
deployment rate is low, measures may be necessary to prolong IPv4 address life
for the existing business as well as for new businesses until networks are IPv6
ready. Some regions may have strong needs to secure IPv4 address space for
translators. A
globally coordinated policy which addresses all the issues listed above to meet
the needs for all RIR regions may result in not solving issues in any of the
regions. 3.
Situation in other RIRs ---------------------------- This
proposal has been be submitted to all RIRs. The status in each RIR region is as
follows:
AfriNIC Reached consensus at AfriNIC 8
ARIN Reached consensus at ARIN XXI and
approved by Board
of Trustees (June 2008)
LACNIC Reached consensus at LACNIC XI
RIPE Currently under discussion 4.
Details of the proposal ---------------------------- This
policy describes the process for the allocation of the remaining IPv4
space from IANA to the RIRs. When a minimum amount of available space is reached,
one /8 will be allocated from IANA to each RIR, replacing the current IPv4
allocation policy. In
order to fulfill the requirements of this policy, at the time it is adopted,
one /8 will be reserved by IANA for each RIR. The reserved allocation units will
no longer be part of the available space at the IANA pool. IANA will also
reserve one /8 to any new RIR at the time it is recognized. The
process for the allocation of the remaining IPv4 space is divided in two
consecutive phases:
4.1. Existing Policy Phase:
During this phase IANA will continue allocating IPv4 addresses to
the RIRs using the existing allocation policy. This phase will
continue until a request for IPv4 address space from any RIR to
IANA either cannot be fulfilled with the remaining IPv4 space
available at the IANA pool or can be fulfilled but leaving the
IANA remaining IPv4 pool empty.
This will be the last IPv4 address space request that IANA will
accept from any RIR. At this point the next phase of the process
will be initiated.
4.2. Exhaustion Phase:
IANA will automatically allocate the reserved IPv4 allocation
units to each RIR (one /8 to each one) and respond to the last
request with the remaining available allocation units at the
IANA pool (M units).
During this phase IANA will automatically allocate one
/8 to each RIR from the reserved space defined in this
policy. IANA will also allocate M allocation units to
the RIR that submitted the last request for IPv4
addresses.
After the completion of the evaluation of the final
request for IPv4 addresses, IANA MUST:
A) Immediately notify the NRO about the activation of the
second phase of this policy.
B) Proceed to allocate M allocation units to the RIR that
submitted the last request for IPv4 address space.
C) Proceed to allocate one /8 to each RIR from the
reserved space. 5.
Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal ------------------------------------------------- Advantages: -
It allows each RIR community to define a policy on how to distribute
the last piece(s) of allocations which best matches their situation. Disadvantages: -
Concerns could be raised about allocating a fixed size to all RIRs,
that it artificially fastens the consumption rate of some RIR regions.
However, its impact is kept to minimum by keeping the allocation size
to a single /8 which makes merely 3-4 months difference. -
Concerns could be raised that explicitly allowing regional policies
will encourage RIR shopping. However, this should not happen if the
requirements within each region is adequately reflected in each RIR's
policy through PDP. RIR may also chose to add criteria to prevent LIRs
from other regions submitting such requests. 6.
Effect on APNIC members ---------------------------- APNIC
members will be able to define a policy on how to distribute the last
piece(s) of allocations which best matches the situation in AP region. 7.
Effect on NIRs ------------------- The
effect on APNIC members applies to members of NIRs. NIRs are therefore expected
to inform their communities of the situation. _______________________________________________ Sig-policy-chair
mailing list Sig-policy-chair at apnic dot net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair
|