[sig-policy]LIRs to manage multiple discreet networks under a single APNICmembership

[Dawn Martin <dawn.martin@mci.com>]

I would like to re-post the following policy proposal for feedback from the
SIG policy group.

Regards,

Dawn Martin

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Version 1.0
Proposed by: Dawn Martin
Date: October 8 2003



Summary
-------


This proposal would provide LIRs with multiple APNIC membership accounts
with a plan to simplify their procedures by combining their membership
accounts while maintaining APNIC's current operational requirements.


Background
----------

The structure of many companies networks span more than one country and
each of these companies must open multiple memberships with APNIC to
provide their network with IP addresses.  The problem with this is
that many of these networks are managed by the same people who have
to access different information for each membership. Membership payments
become due at different times and cause additional processing expense
both to the LIR and to APNIC.

The idea of this was known as an ISP confederation but was dissolved in
1998 due to the policy framework not having vital APNIC procedures
integrated into it.


Motivation
----------

Putting this proposal into policy would allow a member to manage their
membership accounts as a single resource. This would reduce billing
complexity as well as implement a single set of guidelines to be set for
their entire network.  Multiple allocations would continue, as this is
integral for routing purposes.


Current Status (including other RIRs)
-------------------------------------

ARIN has a similar policy in place: Ratified Policy 2001-6: Multiple
Discrete Networks -- Single Maintainer ID

RIPE: Does not have a policy in place for this at this time.

LACNIC: Does not have a policy in place for this type of network at this
time.


Proposal
--------

4.1 	When applying for additional address space from an RIR for new
	networks or additional space for existing networks the
	organization must show greater than 50% utilization for the last
	block granted by the RIR and their allocations as a whole.

4.2 	The organization must not issue additional IP address space to a
	discrete network unless all the blocks sub-allocated to that
	network show utilization greater than 80% individually and as a
	whole.

4.3 	The organization must not sub-allocate a CIDR block larger than
	the current minimum allocation size of the RIR (currently /20
	for APNIC region) to a new network.

4.4 	The organization must not sub-allocate an additional CIDR block
	larger than the current minimum allocation size of the RIR
	(currently /20 for APNIC 's region) to an existing network,
	unless previous growth rates for that network indicate that it is
	likely to utilize a larger CIDR block before the time the
	organization will be requesting an additional block from the RIR.

4.5 	When sub-allocating a block larger than the minimum allocation
	size to an existing network the LIR should use the smallest
	allocation possible out of a larger reserved block. This
	requirement is to reduce the number of routes the LIR will
	announce from that autonomous system.

4.6 	The LIR must follow guidelines of RFC 2050 (or its replacement)
	and the policy of the granting RIR for allocations that are
	assigned or sub-allocated to downstream networks. This includes
	record keeping of IP address requests and network utilization
	documents for audits by the RIR.

4.7 	LIRs with 'multiple membership accounts' should request that this
	policy apply to them, their existing allocations be merged, and
	that additional allocations will fall under this policy.

4.8 	The LIR must record sub-allocations or assignments down to the
	current RIR bit boundary and record them in an approved RIR public
	database.

4.9 	The LIR must keep detailed records of how it has sub-allocated
	space to each discrete network. This should include the block
	sub-allocated, any reserved blocks, and date of allocation/
	reservation. The discrete network allocation information should
	also be present in a public database.

4.10 	An assignment window will be assigned to the LIR and will need to
	be followed for their entire network. Second opinion requests will
	need to be sent to APNIC for review. This is to include blocks of
	addresses that are assigned to new or existing pools within the
	LIRs network.


Fees
----

The IP addresses from all combined resources would be taken into account
when assessing the membership tier for the organization upon the renewal of
their membership.


Implementation
--------------

If this proposal is implemented this policy would go into effect three
months after approval by the APNIC community.


References
----------

http://www.arin.net/policy/2001_6.html

http://www.ripe.net/ripe/wg/lir/lir-actions.html

-----Original Message-----
From: Anne Lord [mailto:anne@apnic.net]
Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 8:56 PM
To: dawn.martin@mci.com
Cc: sig@apnic.net
Subject: Your proposal at the forthcoming APNIC meeting



hi Dawn,

I was just wondering if you would like to re-send your proposal to the
sig-policy mailing list. You didnt receive any feedback previously, but
since the meeting is approaching (and we are about to hit the one month
deadline for receiving proposals) it may be worth contacting the chair and
co-chairs as well as posting to the list - just to serve as a reminder.

We have put your proposal on the website and it has a proposal number. See:

http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/proposals/prop-013-v001.html

If you decide to re-post, I would advise sending in the document (in text)
to <sig-policy-chair@apnic.net> and cc: the group at <sig-policy@apnic.net>.

Will you be at the meeting in KL to present the proposal? If not, will you
be able to find a willing volunteer? If you are, I look forward to meeting
you there.

Best wishes,
Anne