[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[sig-policy] prop-070-v001: Maximum IPv4 allocation size
Dear SIG members
The policy proposal 'Maximum IPv4 allocation size' has been sent to the
Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC
27 in Manila, Philippines, 23-27 February 2009. The proposal's history
can be found at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-070-v001.html
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-070-v001: Maximum IPv4 allocation size
________________________________________________________________________
Authors: James Spenceley
james@vocus.com.au
Jonny Martin
jonny@jonnynet.net
Version: 1
Date: 23 January 2009
1. Introduction
----------------
The policy seeks to create a maximum APNIC allocation size. The proposal
then seeks to gradually decrease the maximum allocation size based on
the remaining number of /8s in the IANA free pool.
2. Summary of current problem
------------------------------
Currently, any APNIC account-holder can request and receive a single
allocation that could greatly reduce the IANA free pool.
In a worse case, it is possible that an APNIC account holder could
request and receive a large portion of the final address space allocated
to APNIC by IANA. (This is excluding the final /8 to be allocated to
APNIC under the "Global policy for the allocation of the remaining IPv4
address space", which is in its final stages of the global policy
process [1]).
This situation does not promote fair allocation of the remaining address
resources either globally or within the APNIC region.
3. Situation in other RIRs
---------------------------
AfriNIC, ARIN, LACNIC and RIPE currently have no maximum allocation
size.
If this proposal is received well in the APNIC region, the authors are
happy to work with other regions to propose this policy in other RIR
policy forums.
4. Details of the proposal
---------------------------
This is a proposal with two parts:
4.1 On implementation of the policy, the APNIC maximum IPv4 allocation
size will be a single /8.
4.2 The maximum allocation size is reduced over time based on the size
of the IANA free pool. The maximum allocation size would be reduced
when the IANA free pool reaches the following thresholds:
IANA free pool Maximum allocation
30 x /8s /8 (current)
25 x /8s /9
20 x /8s /12
15 x /8s /14
10 x /8s /16
5 x /8s /18
5. Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
------------------------------------------------
5.1 Advantages
- Promotes broader allocation of IP resources by ensuring no single
member requests a large portion of the remaining address space.
- Provides smoother distribution of the remaining space across
space across all APNIC members.
- More evenly reduces the allocation size down to that proposed by
prop-067 use of final /8 [2].
- Creates positive feedback to deploy IPv6 by reducing the size of
allocation of IPv4.
5.2 Disadvantages
- If only implemented by APNIC, it disadvantages APNIC and its
members as other RIR will not be artificially limiting their
allocation rate and will therefore receive a larger portion of
the remaining address space.
- It could create more work for APNIC account holders and the APNIC
Secretariat as requests may be more frequent as a result of the
reduced maximum allocation.
6. Effect on APNIC members
---------------------------
This proposal potentially impacts all APNIC members who will require
additional IPv4 allocations, in particular larger members who are more
likely to require large allocations.
7. Effect on NIRs
------------------
The proposal impacts the NIRs in the same way as APNIC members.
8. References
-------------
[1] prop-055: Global policy for the allocation of the remaining IPv4
address space
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-055-v002.html
[2] prop-067: final use of /8
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-067-v001.html
-30-
