Re: [sig-policy] Final call for comments: [prop-031-v002] "Proposal to amend APNIC IPv6 assignment and utilisation requirement policy"

[David Chen <david@twnic.net.tw>]

Hi all, I'm David Chen. I would like to confirm that if IPv6 HD ratio is 
amended from 0.8 to 0.94, will the utilisation be changed to a higher 
number under HD 0.94 in the fee schedule? As I know in the APNIC fee 
schedule, IPv6 per-address fee is calculated according to current HD 
ratio requirement. 
http://www.apnic.net/docs/corpdocs/member-fee-schedule.html. Following 
this rule, it would be a big influence on per-address fee.
For example,
The utilisation number of /48s for /32 under HD ratio 0.8 is 7,132. The 
total per-address fee payable for an allocation of /32 to a "Very Large" 
member is calculated as : 7,132 * 0.03 =  $213.96

If under HD ratio 0.94, then the utilisation number of /48s for /32 is 
around 33,690. The total per-address fee payable for an allocation of 
/32 to a "Very Large" member is calculated as : 33,690 * 0.03 = $1,010.7

Am I right? Please clarify this for me, thanks.

Regards,

David Chen


Save Vocea wrote:

> Dear colleagues
>
> APNIC welcomes comments, questions, and suggestions on the following  
> policy
> proposal:
>
> ____________________
>
> Final call for comments: [prop-031-v002]
> "Proposal to amend APNIC IPv6 assignment and utilisation requirement  
> policy"
> ____________________
>
> This is the final call for comments on policy proposal [prop-031-v002]
> "Proposal to amend APNIC IPv6 assignment and utilisation requirement  
> policy".
>
> Version one of this proposal was discussed at APNIC 20. The proposal to
> amend the IPv6 HD ratio from 0.8 to 0.94 reached consensus and is now
> documented in [prop-031-v002]. Other parts of proposal [prop-031-v001]
> did not reach consensus.
>
> Regarding the amendment of the IPv6 HD ratio, the following consensus  
> was
> reached:
>
>    "The SIG accepted by consensus the proposed policy process,
>     which requires the text proposal to be sent to the mailing
>     list one month before the meeting, an eight week comment
>     period on the mailing list after the meeting, and final
>     endorsement from EC."
>
> This proposal is now submitted to the sig-policy mailing list for an
> eight week discussion period. At the end of that period, if consensus
> appears to have been achieved, the Chair of the Policy SIG will
> ask the Executive Council to endorse the proposal for implementation.
>
> *   Send all comments and questions to:   <sig-policy@apnic.net>
> *   Deadline for comments:                  16 November 2005
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> Proposal details
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> Authors:    Stephan Millet  <stephan (a) telstra.net>
>             Geoff Huston    <gih (a) apnic.net>
>
> Version:    2.0
>
> Date:       19 September 2005
>
> Purpose
> -------
>
> To amend the APNIC IPv6 address allocation policies regarding the
> definition of the threshold value for end-site allocation efficiency.
>
> These measures, if undertaken generally by all RIRs, and assuming that
> further measures are undertaken by the addressing community regarding
> the general adoption of an end-site allocation size that would be
> substantially smaller than the existing default value of a /48, would
> increase the anticipated useful lifetime of IPv6 to encompass a period
> in excess of 100 years, in which case no further allocation policy
> changes would be anticipated.
>
>
> Proposal
> --------
>
> To amend the IPv6 threshold end site allocation utilisation level to
> that matching an HD Ratio value of 0.94.
>
>
> Impact summary
> --------------
>
>   End users:
>
>     There is no impact arising from this policy proposal.
>
>
>   ISPs and LIRs:
>
>     With the higher threshold end-site allocation efficiency level,
>     when based on a 0.94 HD Ratio, ISPs will need to undertake network
>     address plans according to this target level.
>
>
>   NIRs:
>
>     These proposed policy changes are not anticipated to have any  
> impact on
>     NIR operation, other than implementation of a 0.94 density metric
>     to replace the existing 0.80 value, as per APNIC policy.
>
>
>   APNIC:
>
>     APNIC will need to amend its IPv6 criteria to reflect the altered
>     HD ratio.
>
>
> Background material
> -------------------
>
> This material is not formally part of the policy proposal. It is
> included here only for informational purposes.
>
>
> 1. Paper: The IPv6 Address Plan
>    http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2005-07/ipv6size.html
>    Geoff Huston
>
> 2. Internet Draft: draft-narten-iana-rir-ipv6-considerations-00.txt
>    http://draft-narten-iana-rir-ipv6-considerations.potaroo.net/
>    Thomas Narten
>
> 3. Internet Draft: draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-48boundary-00.txt
>    http://draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-48boundary.potaroo.net/
>    Thomas Narten
>    Geoff Huston
>    Lea Roberts
>
>
> ____________________
>
> References
> ____________________
>
> Proposal details including full text of proposal, presentations, links
> to relevant meeting minutes, and links to mailing list discussions are
> available at:
>
>      http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/proposals/prop-031-v002.html
>
>
> --
> Savenaca Vocea, Policy Development Manager, APNIC   <save@apnic.net>
> http:// 
> www.apnic.net                                                        
> ph/fx +61 7 3858 3100/99
>
>
>
>
>
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management 
> policy           *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy