Hi Albert, As a practical matter, I don’t think the NRPM overrides your ability to terminate your contract with ARIN should that become a business requirement.
Do you have alternative language to suggest that is clear, concise, and preserves the intent of narrowly boxing in nano-allocations for the tiniest of providers with IPv4 rather than incenting undersizing IPv6 allocations? Remember that the whole reason for the default /32 allocation is that we wish for IPv6 allocations to be the polar opposite of IPv4 slow-start - a one-and-done approach that minimizes both unnecessary routing table growth and the need to come back to ARIN for more space. Thanks, -r > On Jul 21, 2020, at 11:26 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > I have a problem with this language: > > "Downgrades of any IPv6 allocation to less than a /36 are not permitted > regardless of the ISP’s current or former IPv4 number resource holdings." > > Downgrades include in my mind a return, and thus a downgrade to 0. This > language seems to lock in anyone who has ever requested IPv6 space. > > Does this make a request for IPv6 space from ARIN like the Hotel California, > where you can never leave.... > > If I were one of those ISP's with a /24 of IPv4, and I took the minimum > allocation of IPv6 which raised my fees to $500 from $250, does this language > make me continue to pay $500/yr even if I decide to return all my IPv6 > resources to ARIN, and either get IPv6 space from my upstream or forgo use of > IPv6? > > Albert Erdmann > Network Administrator > Paradise On Line Inc. > > > On Tue, 21 Jul 2020, ARIN wrote: > >> On 16 July 2020, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) advanced the following Draft >> Policy to Recommended Draft Policy status: >> >> ARIN-2020-3: IPv6 Nano-allocations >> >> The text of the Recommended Draft Policy is below, and may also be found at: >> >> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2020_3/ >> >> You are encouraged to discuss all Recommended Draft Policies on PPML prior >> to their presentation at the next ARIN Public Policy Consultation (PPC). >> PPML and PPC discussions are invaluable to the AC when determining community >> consensus. >> >> The PDP can be found at: >> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/ >> >> Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at: >> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/ >> >> Regards, >> >> Sean Hopkins >> Policy Analyst >> American Registry for Internet Numbers >> >> >> >> Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3: IPv6 Nano-allocations >> >> AC Assessment of Conformance with the Principles of Internet Number Resource >> Policy: >> >> Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2020-3 provides for small IPv6 allocations to >> ISPs. This policy would allow the smallest ISP organizations to obtain a /40 >> of IPv6 addresses. This recommended draft is technically sound, supported by >> the community and enables fair and impartial administration of number >> resources by providing the smallest organizations the opportunity to obtain >> an IPv6 allocation without a fee increase under the current fee schedule. >> >> Problem Statement: >> >> ARIN’s ISP registration services fee structure has graduated fee categories >> based upon the total amount of number resources held within the ARIN >> registry. >> >> In the case of the very smallest ISPs, if a 3X-Small ISP (with a /24 or >> smaller of IPv4) gets the present minimal-sized IPv6 allocation (a /36), its >> annual fees will double from $250 to $500/year. >> >> According to a Policy Experience Report presented by Registration Services >> to the AC at its annual workshop in January 2020, this represents a >> disincentive to IPv6 adoption with a substantial fraction of so-situated >> ISPs saying “no thanks” and abandoning their request for IPv6 number >> resources when informed of the impact on their annual fees. >> >> This can be addressed by rewriting subsection 6.5.2.1(b). Initial Allocation >> Size to allow allocation of a /40 to only the smallest ISPs upon request, >> and adding a new clause 6.5.2.1(g) to cause an automatic upgrade to at least >> a /36 in the case where the ISP is no longer 3X-Small. >> >> Reserving /40s only for organizations initially expanding into IPv6 from an >> initial sliver of IPv4 space will help to narrowly address the problem >> observed by Registration Services while avoiding unintended consequences by >> accidentally giving a discount for undersized allocations. >> >> Policy Statement: >> >> Replace the current 6.5.2.1(b) with the following: >> >> b. In no case shall an LIR receive smaller than a /32 unless they >> specifically request a /36 or /40. >> >> In order to be eligible for a /40, an ISP must meet the following >> requirements: >> >> Hold IPv4 direct allocations totaling a /24 or less (to include zero) >> Hold IPv4 reassignments/reallocations totaling a /22 or less (to include >> zero) >> In no case shall an ISP receive more than a /16 initial allocation. >> >> Add 6.5.2.1(g) as follows: >> >> g. An LIR that requests a smaller /36 or /40 allocation is entitled to >> expand the allocation to any nibble aligned size up to /32 at any time >> without renumbering or additional justification. /40 allocations shall be >> automatically upgraded to /36 if at any time said LIR’s IPv4 direct >> allocations exceed a /24. Expansions up to and including a /32 are not >> considered subsequent allocations, however any expansions beyond /32 are >> considered subsequent allocations and must conform to section 6.5.3. >> Downgrades of any IPv6 allocation to less than a /36 are not permitted >> regardless of the ISP’s current or former IPv4 number resource holdings. >> >> Timetable for Implementation: Immediate >> >> Comments: >> >> The intent of this policy proposal is to make IPv6 adoption at the very >> bottom end expense-neutral for the ISP and revenue-neutral for ARIN. The >> author looks forward to a future era wherein IPv6 is the dominant technology >> and IPv4 is well in decline and considered optional leading the Community to >> conclude that sunsetting this policy is prudent in the interests of avoiding >> an incentive to request undersized IPv6 allocations. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
