APNIC Home APNIC Home
Info & FAQ |  Resource services |  Training |  Meetings |  Membership |  Documents |  Whois & Search |  Internet community

You're here:  Home  Mailing Lists sig-policy 


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[sig-policy] prop-111-v001: Request-based expansion of IPv6 default allocation size



Dear SIG members

The proposal "prop-111-v001: Request-based expansion of IPv6 default
allocation size" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be
presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 37 in Petaling Jaya, Malaysia, on
Thursday, 27 February 2014.

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:

  Â- Do you support or oppose this proposal?
  Â- Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
   Âtell the community about your situation.
  Â- Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
  Â- Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
  Â- What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
   Âeffective?


Information about this policy proposals is available from:

  http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/111

Andy, Masato

----------------------------------------------------------------------
prop-111-v001: Request-based expansion of IPv6 default allocation size
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Author: Â Â Â Tomohiro Fujisaki
       fujisaki@syce.net


1. Problem statement
--------------------

 ÂCurrently, IPv6 minimum allocation size to LIRs is defined as /32 in
 Âthe "IPv6 address allocation and assignment policy", while APNIC
 Âcurrently reserves up to /29 for each /32 allocation. It's better to
 Âexpand this minimum allocation size up to /29 since:

 Â- For traffic control purpose, some LIRs announce address blocks
  Âlonger than /32 (e.g. /35). However, some ISPs set filters to block
  Âaddress size longer than /32. If LIRs have multiple /32, they can
  Âannounce these blocks and its reachability will be better than
  Âlonger prefix.

 Â- If an LIR needs address blocks larger than /32, LIRs may tend to
  Âannounce as a single prefix if a /29 is allocated initially at
  Âonce. i.e., total number of announced prefixes in case 1 may be
  Âsmaller than in case 2.

  Âcase 1:
  ÂThe LIR obtains /29 at the beginning of IPv6 network construction.

  Âcase 2:
  ÂThe LIR obtains /32, and /31, /30 additionally with the subsequent
  Âallocation mechanism.

 Â- Before sparse allocation mechanism implemented in late 2008, /29
  Âwas reserved for all /32 holders by sequence allocation mechanism
  Âin the early years. It is possible to use these reserved
  Âblocks efficiently with this modification.


2. Objective of policy change
-----------------------------

 ÂThis proposal modifies the eligibility for an organization to receive
 Âan initial IPv6 allocation up to a /29 by request basis.


3. Situation in other regions
-----------------------------

 ÂRIPE-NCC:
 ÂThe policy "Extension of IPv6 /32 to /29 on a per-allocation vs
 Âper-LIR basis" is adopted in RIPE-NCC and LIRs in RIPE region can get
 Âup to /29 by default.


4. Proposed policy solution
----------------------------

 Â- Change the text to "5.2.2 Minimum initial allocation size" of
  Âcurrent policy document as below:

  ÂOrganizations that meet the initial allocation criteria are
  Âeligible to receive an initial allocation of /32. For allocations
  Âup to /29 no additional documentation is necessary.

 Â- Add following text in the policy document:

  Âfor Existing IPv6 address space holders

  ÂLIRs that hold one or more IPv6 allocations are able to request
  Âextension of each of these allocations up to a /29 without meeting
  Âthe utilization rate for subsequent allocation and providing
  Âfurther documentation.


5. Explain the advantages of the proposal
-----------------------------------------

 Â- It will be possible for LIRs to control traffic easier.
 Â- It is possible to use current reserved blocks efficiently.


6. Explain the disadvantages of the proposal
--------------------------------------------

 ÂSome people may argue this will lead to inefficient utilization of
 ÂIPv6 space. However, the space up to /29 is reserved by APNIC
 Âsecretariat for each /32 allocation.


7. Impact on resource holders
-----------------------------
 ÂNIRs must implement this policy if it is implemented by APNIC.