[sig-policy] prop-102-v001: Sparse allocation guidelines for IPv6 resour

  • To: "sig-policy at apnic dot net SIG List" <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
  • Subject: [sig-policy] prop-102-v001: Sparse allocation guidelines for IPv6 resource allocations
  • From: Andy Linton <asjl at lpnz dot org>
  • Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 14:24:16 +1300
  • Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
  • In-reply-to: <4F264B54.9010307 at lpnz dot org>
  • 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>
  • Organization: LPNZ
  • References: <rt-3.8.8-8606-1327897623-1676.2146224-15-0@apnic.net> <4F2623F5.1090407@apnic.net> <4F264B54.9010307@lpnz.org>
  • User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.17) Gecko/20080914 Lightning/0.9 Thunderbird/2.0.0.17 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666
    • 
      The proposal "prop-102-v001: Sparse allocation guidelines for IPv6
      resource allocations" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.
      
      It will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 33 in New Delhi, India,
      Thursday, 1 March 2012.
      
      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
      
      Andy, Skeeve, Masato
      
      
      
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      
      prop-102-v001: Sparse allocation guidelines for IPv6 resource
                      allocations
      
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      
      
      Author:  Dean Pemberton
                <dean at deanpemberton dot com>
      
      Co-authors:  None at present
                    Co-authors welcome
      
      
      
      1.  Introduction
      ----------------
      
      This proposal formalises the current use of a sparse allocation strategy
      when allocating IPv6 resources from the APNIC free pool.  This also has
      the effect of bringing the algorithm and its parameters under the
      oversight of the APNIC policy development process.
      
      The proposal also seeks to give members some assurance that if they are
      able to show a growth plan for 5 years upon applying for an initial 2
      year assignment, that subsequent assignments will be allocated from a
      sufficiently sized, sparsely allocated block.
      
      
      2.  Summary of the current problem
      ----------------------------------
      
      Large networks and economies are requesting  blocks of IPv6 space larger
      than the current allocation models allow. At present the allocation
      strategies look at a timeline on the order of 1-2 years.  Organisations
      are now having to look to a 5-10 year time-frame when deploying large
      IPv6 networks.
      
      They are understandably concerned about their ability to secure access
      to 5-10 years of aggregatable address space if they are only allocated
      on 1-2 year needs basis. We have seen requests in proposals such as
      prop-98, prop-99 and prop-100, which seek to find ways to allow for
      larger allocations or reserve an amount of space for future
      organisational use. All of these proposals seek to make large changes to
      the way that IPv6 addresses are allocated by APNIC in order to address
      these legitimate concerns.
      
      It would seem however that there is an alternative solution which would
      only require a small change to current operating procedure.
      
      At present the APNIC operating procedure is for hostmasters to use a
      method of sparse-allocation when allocating IPv6 addresses out of the
      APNIC free pool. An in depth discussion of sparse-allocation, and indeed
      the implementation used by APNIC is beyond the scope of this proposal.
      
      Suffice to say however, that sparse-allocation allows for allocations to
      be given from a larger pool in such a way that members can request
      neighbouring allocations at a later date and aggregate these together in
      to a larger routable allocation.
      
      While this has been APNIC operating procedure for some time, it is not
      subject to oversight by any particular APNIC policy. As such the exact
      algorithm used as well as the parameters around this sparse-allocation
      algorithm are not open to member input or adjustment through the policy
      development process.
      
      While members may surmise that a neighbouring allocation may be waiting
      for them should they need it, this is not guarenteed and therefore can
      not be used as part of the members future planning process.
      
      
      3.  Situation in other RIRs
      ---------------------------
      
      Unknown at this point - Investigation under way
      
      
      4.  Details
      -----------
      
      This proposal seeks to make the following additions/changes to APNIC
        policy
      
           1. Mandate the use of sparse allocation when allocating IPv6
              resources from APNIC address pools
      
           2.  Publish the details of the sparse allocation algorithm and
               ensure that it is able to be debated through the existing policy
               development framework.
      
           3.  Ensure that if a member can show a growth plan for the next 5
               years that this amount is sparsely allocated when an allocation
               is made under existing apnic-089-v010 guidelines.
      
      
      5.  Pros/Cons
      -------------
      
      Advantages:
      
           -  APNIC Members are able to ensure that they will receive
              aggregatable blocks within a 5 year growth projection.  They can
              use this surety in their internal network planning processes.
      
           -  APNIC Members will have the surety that the current sparse
              allocation mechanism will continue to be used.
      
           -  Rather than simply providing a member with an allocation of 5
              years worth of space which may go unused due to imprecise
              planning.  Under this proposal, the majority of the space remains
              in the APNIC free pool and can be reallocated after the 5 year
              sparse allocation window expires.
      
      Disadvantages:
      
           -  It is possible that this proposal may require APNIC to keep a
              larger pool in reserve that previously.  This could be modelled
              using information from the secretariat.
      
      
      6.  Effect on APNIC Members
      -------------------
      
      APNIC members would be able to see the published details of the sparse
      allocation policy used by APNIC to allocate IPv6 resources from its
      address pool.
      
      APNIC members would apply for address space much like they do today and
      an allocation would be made under the same rules as apnic-089-v010.  The
      only different would be that if the member can show a growth estimate
      for up to 5 years, APNIC will allocate their resources from a sparse
      allocation to accommodate this growth and future resource requests.
      
      
      7.  Effect on NIRs
      ------------------
      
      The policy would apply when NIRs request address space from APNIC
      The proposal allows NIRs to choose when to adopt this policy for their
      Members.