________________________________________________________________________

prop-042-v001:   Proposal to change IPv6 initial allocation criteria
                 
________________________________________________________________________


Author:     Jordi Palet Martinez, Consulintel

Version:    1

Date:       22 January 2007

SIG:        Policy



Introduction
------------
This policy modification is intended to provide a solution for the
lengthy discussions that have taken place in the different regions
regarding existing IPv6 policies. It also takes account of the changes
that have already taken place in other Regional Internet Registry
(RIR) service regions.


Summary of the current problem
------------------------------
It is clear that there are small Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that
do not currently have  200 customers, consequently is not feasible for
them to make "at least 200 /48" assignments in two years. It is,
however, unfair that these ISPs have no access to IPv6 address space.


Situation in other RIRs
-----------------------
This proposal has also been submitted to ARIN, AfriNIC, LACNIC and RIPE
NCC regions. 

Some of the RIRs don't have already the 200 /48 restriction and have
some text that freely allows the hostmaster to consider any submission
("reasonable number").



Details
-------
The following policy changes are proposed for APNIC-089, "IPv6 Address
Allocation and Assignment Policy":

1.  Initial allocation criteria

    The following changes are proposed in section 5.1.1 of APNIC-089:

    a) Remove the need to have a plan to make 200 /48 assignments in
       two years and replace it with a plan to make a reasonable
       number of assignments in two years.


Pros/Cons
---------

Advantages:

    There have been already clear examples and discussions in different
    regions about the need for this modification.

    By setting up this policy, we would avoid creating an unfair
    situation among different RIR service regions. Other RIRs have
    already modified the original IPv6 common policy to avoid these
    barriers.

    We could possibly say that an arbitrary number of sites in order to
    qualify for an allocation could be considered illegal in some
    countries. The APNIC community cannot set policies that could prove
    unlawful as this could have important implications.


Disadvantages:

    One possible effect of this proposal would be a growth of global
    routing tables. This is only to be expected when new allocations
    are made possible under this proposal.

    Opposing arguments should avoid being unfair to smaller ISPs that
    could not justify a fixed number of assignments. Such a policy
    could be seen as irrational and might be comparable with imposing
    a similar requirement for IPv4 address space allocations, which
    the community would be unlikely to accept.



Effect on APNIC
---------------
There may be a small increase in the number of IPv6 allocation requests
from LIRs that do not have a plan for 200 customers.



Effect on NIRs
--------------
NIRs may need to adapt their own similar policy. Otherwise, small ISPs
may become APNIC LIRs to access an IPv6 prefix.