[sig-policy] prop-078: Reserving /10 IPv4 address space to facilitate IP

  • To: Policy SIG <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
  • Subject: [sig-policy] prop-078: Reserving /10 IPv4 address space to facilitate IPv6 deployment
  • From: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
  • Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 09:12:23 +0200
  • Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
  • List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
  • List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
  • List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
  • List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
  • List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
  • List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
  • User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.5 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
    • 
      The proposal, 'Reserving /10 IPv4 address space to facilitate IPv6
      deployment', has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be
      presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 28 in Beijing, China, 25-28 August
      2009.
      
      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?
      
      
      Information about this and other policy proposals is available from:
      
                 http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals
      
      
      Randy, Jian and Ching-Heng
      
      ________________________________________________________________________
      
      prop-078-v001: Reserving /10 IPv4 address space to facilitate IPv6
                      deployment
      ________________________________________________________________________
      
      
      Authors:   Terence Zhang Yinghao
                  <zhangyinghao at cnnic dot cn>
      
                  Jane Zhang
                  <zhangjian at cnnic dot cn>
      
                  Wendy Zhao Wei
                  <zhaowei at cnnic dot cn>
      
      Version:   1
      
      Date:      29 July 2009
      
      
      
      1.  Introduction
      ----------------
      
      This proposal seeks to ensure some small blocks of IPv4 space will
      remain available to LIRs for a long time to ease the co-existence of
      IPv4 and IPv6 and to facilitate IPv6 deployment.
      
      It is proposed that when APNIC receives its last /8 IPv4 allocation from
      IANA, a contiguous /10 IPv4 block will be set aside and dedicated to
      facilitate IPv6 deployment.
      
      
      2.  Summary of the current problem
      ----------------------------------
      
      The IPv4 address pool is expected to be depleted in the near future, but
      the Internet will still use IPv4 for many years during the adoption of
      IPv6, during this period, LIRs will need to connect to the IPv4 Internet
      while they deploy services using the IPv6 Internet.
      
      APNIC's current "final /8" policy [1] prevents any one organization
      consuming too many IPv4 address from the final /8, which ensure new LIRs
      can  participate in the IPv4 Internet. However, the final /8 policy
      does not require LIRs to deploy IPv6. Therefore, it is possible that
      LIRs use those allocated address entirely for IPv4 services. Later, when
      they intend to deploy IPv6, they will have no chance to get another IPv4
      allocation from APNIC under the "final /8" policy, even if there are
      a certain amount of unallocated IPv4 addresses remaining in APNIC's
      pool. Instead, the LIR would have to re-organize their IPv4 network to
      set aside some addresses. This would impact their progress in IPv6
      deployment.
      
      To remedy this problem, this policy proposal seeks to encourage LIRs to
      deploy IPv6 and ensure IPv4 space will remain available for LIRs' IPv6
      deployment.
      
      
      3.  Situation in other RIRs
      ---------------------------
      
      ARIN has adopted a similar policy:
      
           2008-5: Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 Deployment
           https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2008_5.html
      
      RIPE has similar policy proposal under discussion:
      
           2009-04: IPv4 Allocation and Assignments to Facilitate IPv6
           Deployment
           http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2009-04.html
      
      AfriNIC and LACNIC currently have no similar policies or proposals.
      
      
      4.  Details
      -----------
      
      It is proposed that when APNIC receives its last /8 IPv4 allocation from
      IANA, a contiguous /10 IPv4 block from the /8 will be set aside and
      dedicated to facilitate IPv6 deployment.
      
      Allocations and assignments from this dedicated /10 block must be
      justified by immediate IPv6 deployment needs; examples of such needs
      include: IPv4 addresses for key dual stack devices, NAT-PT or NAT464
      translators, etc.
      
      The size of each allocation from this /10 block is /24, or APNIC's
      minimum allocation size in force at time of the allocation, which ever
      is smaller.
      
      Each LIR may apply for and receive the specified allocation size
      regardless of LIR size or intended membership tier.
      
      In order to receive a first allocation or assignment under this policy:
      
           1. The applicant must demonstrate immediate IPv6 deployment needs,
              especially for IPv6 to IPv4 internetworking.
      
           2. The applicant must either have existing IPv6 addresses or valid
              application for IPv6 addresses.
      
           3. The applicant must be a current APNIC account holder or a member
              of an NIR.
      
      In order to receive subsequent allocation or assignment under this
      policy:
      
           1. The applicant must demonstrate immediate IPv6 deployment needs,
              especially for IPv6 to IPv4 internetworking.
      
           2. The applicant may not have received resources under this policy
              in the preceding 12 months.
      
           3. Previous allocations/assignments under this policy must be
              strictly used to facilitate IPv6 deployment, and the utilization
              rate is higher than 75%;
      
           4. The utilization rate of previous allocations/assignments of other
              IPv4 addresses allocated from APNIC must reach 80%, or APNIC's
              current IPv4 allocation policy required utilization rate at the
              time of the allocation.
      
           5. The applicant must be a current APNIC account holder or a member
              of an NIR.
      
      
      Allocations under this policy do not affect an LIR's eligibility to
      apply for IPv4 addresses  under the "final /8' policy", and vice versa.
      
      
      5.  Pros/Cons
      -------------
      
      5.1 Advantages:
      
           - This proposal will encourage IPv6 deployment as it ensures LIRs
             can receive dedicated IPv4 address space from the APNIC if they
             have an immediate need to deploy IPv6.
      
           - The dedicated /10 block provides 16,384 allocations, which ensures
             that no organization lacks IPv4 address space for IPv6 deployment
             for many years.
      
      
      5.2 Disadvantages:
      
           - There is a remote possibility that, after setting aside one /10
             under this proposal, the remainder of the last /8 may be used
             up. If that were to happen, LIR would need to have immediate IPv6
             deployment needs to qualify for IPv4 addresses from APNIC.
      
             However, with 12,288 possible allocations from the current minimum
             allocation (at time of writing), and considering that the
             projection of APNIC members in 2013 is 4000, it is not likely the
             12,288 allocations will be used up. In addition, if it does
             happen, applying for IPv4 address without any intent to deploy
             IPv6 is not practical.
      
             Also, the size of allocation under this policy (/24) can be
             reduced to suit future needs, if necessary.
      
      
      6.  Effect on APNIC members
      ---------------------------
      
      This proposal allows APNIC LIRs (existing and new) to receive dedicated
      IPv4 address space from APNIC to facilitate IPv6 deployment.
      
      
      7.  Effect on NIRs
      ------------------
      
      This proposal has no direct impact to NIRs. NIR members (existing and
      new) can receive dedicated IPv4 address space from APNIC to facilitate
      IPv6 deployment.
      
      
      8. References
      -------------
      
      [1] See section 9.10, "Policies for IPv4 address space
           management in the Asia Pacific region"
           http://www.apnic.net/policy/add-manage-policy.html#9.10
      
      
      9. Appendix A
      -------------
      
      Reason for reserving a contiguous /10
      
           The IPv6 Internet may take a long time to develop, and since IPv4
           and IPv6 may co-exist for many years, the demand for IPv6 to IPv4
           internetworking will be sustained for many years.
      
           The intention of the proposal is to stimulate native IPv6 deployment
           as much as possible, while supporting the need for IPv6 networks to
           communicate with the IPv4 world.
      
           The current policy for allocations from the "final /8" will provide
           16384 allocations. Setting aside a /10 from that /8 will reduce the
           allocations to 12288. Since currently APNIC has about 2000 members
           and is projected to have 4000 members in 2013, it is feasible to set
           aside a /10 to encourage and ensure IPv6 deployment.
      
           The dedicated /10 block itself can provide 16384 allocations with
           the /24 maximum allocation size. This, in addition to the
           requirements of a 12-month interval between allocations from this
           block and a 75% utilization rate for previous allocations from this
           /10 before additional allocations from this block can be made, would
           prevent hoarding and ensure this pool will last many years.
      
      
      Reason for /24 allocation size
      
           Allocations under this policy are mainly for IPv6 to IPv4
           internetworking purpose, such as IPv4 addresses for key dual stack
           devices, NAT-PT or NAT464 translators, etc. Therefore, we need only
           a few addresses to do the job. In most cases we can foresee, a /24,
           or even a /27, can perfectly satisfy the deployment needs for one
           organization.
      
           The reason we choose /24 is we do not want to create longer prefixes
           in the Internet routing table just because of this policy. Based on
           knowledge of current Internet's route filtering culture, we believe
           /24 is the most generally accepted longest prefix currently.
      
           Of course, it is possible routing practices will change when we are
           running out of IPv4. Therefore, in the future, if longer route
           prefixes are more generally accepted, or a smaller minimum
           allocation size takes effect, we can certainly reduce the size of
           allocation under this policy to suit future needs, and ensure more
           allocations from this block are possible.
      
           Finally, a relatively larger allocation size will minimize the
           possibility of an organization getting multiple non-contiguous small
           blocks in multiple allocations.