________________________________________________________________________

prop-062-v002: Use of final /8
________________________________________________________________________


Authors:   Philip Smith
           pfs@cisco.com

           Jonny Martin
           jonny@jonnynet.net

           Randy Bush
           randy@psg.com

Version:   2

Date:      28 August 2008


This proposal contains the element of the proposal that reached 
consensus following community discussion at the APNIC 26 Policy SIG
on Thursday 28 August 2008.


1.  Introduction
----------------

This proposal describes how APNIC should handle its last /8 worth of
address space at the time of total depletion of the IANA free pool.

The proposal seeks to ensure that new and existing LIRs can receive a
minimum amount of IPv4 address space to assist with their
participation in the Internet industry as the industry transitions to
using the IPv6 protocol over the next few years.


2.  Summary of current problem
------------------------------

The IANA IPv4 address pool is diminishing rapidly and is expected to
be totally depleted in the very near future.  The intention of the
proposal's authors is to use APNIC's final /8 worth of address space
to reduce the surprise incurred by new LIRs during the transition from
the IPv4 to IPv6 protocol.

The Internet will still use IPv4 for several years during the adoption
of IPv6.  During this period new LIRs will need to participate in the
IPv4 Internet while they deploy services using the IPv6 Internet.

Inability to participate directly in the IPv4 Internet inhibits new
LIRs' ability to provide service.  If this were to happen, new LIRs
would have to resort to address translation devices to map the private
IPv4 address space they use into the public address space received
from their upstream providers.

Existing APNIC policy regarding the distribution of IPv4 address space
makes no allowance for IPv4 allocations to new LIRs after the IANA
pool is exhausted.

Without any particular policy for this address block, APNIC's normal
IPv4 allocation rules would apply.  It is quite feasible, for example,
that one organisation could consume the entire remaining /8 worth of
address space held by APNIC.

This policy proposal seeks to address that problem.


3.  Situation in other RIRs
---------------------------

As far as is known, only LACNIC has implemented a similar policy.  We
would like to recommend that the other RIRs consider analogous
proposals.

This policy proposal applies to the APNIC service region only.  It is
highly likely that similar policy proposals will be made in other RIR
regions also.

It should be noted that at the recent LACNIC XI meeting, consensus was
reached on the following policy proposal:

    LAC-2008-04: Special IPv4 Allocations/Assignments Reserved for New
    Members
    www.lacnic.net/documentos/politicas/LAC-2008-04-propuesta-en.pdf

Under the LACNIC proposal, when there is no more IPv4 address space in
the IANA free pool, LACNIC will reserve a /12 out of their remaining
pool.  From this /12, LACNIC will allocate /22s to new LIRs and assign
/24s to critical infrastructure.


4.  Details of the proposal
---------------------------

This proposal describing the distribution of APNIC's final /8 worth of
address space has three parts:


4.1 New LIRs

    It is proposed that each new LIR receive IPv4 addresses which they
    can use for supporting legacy IPv4 services to ensure their full
    presence on the IPv4 Internet during the transition phase to IPv6:

        - Each new LIR may receive address space according to
          APNIC's minimum allocation size in force at time of
          allocation.  If APNIC's minimum allocation were to reduce in
          size in future, the allocation made under this policy should
          also be reduced to match.

        - Each new LIR may receive the specified allocation size
          regardless of LIR size or intended membership tier.

        - New LIRs may apply for and receive this allocation once they
          meet the criteria to receive IPv4 address space according to
          APNIC's allocation policy in force at the time (currently
          documented in [APNIC-86]).

    A new LIR in this proposal is defined as being an organisation
    which has recently become a full member of APNIC or a full member
    of one of APNIC's NIRs but has yet to be assigned or allocated any
    IPv4 address space.

    Membership of APNIC as an LIR is determined by APNIC's membership
    criteria at the time of application.  Membership of an APNIC NIR
    is determined by each individual NIR's membership criteria at the
    time of application.


4.2 Existing LIRs

    It is proposed that each existing LIR may request and receive only
    a single allocation from the remaining /8 worth of address space:

        - Each existing LIR may receive APNIC's current minimum
          allocation size in force at time of allocation.  If APNIC's
          current minimum allocation were to reduce in size in future,
          the allocation made under this policy should also be reduced
          to match.

        - Each existing LIR may receive the specified allocation size
          regardless of size or intended membership tier

        - Each existing LIR may apply for and receive this allocation
          once they meet the criteria to receive IPv4 address space
          according to APNIC's current allocation policy in force at
          the time (currently documented in [APNIC-86]).

    This ensures that each existing LIR receives routable IPv4
    addresses which they can use for supporting legacy IPv4 services
    during the transition phase to IPv6.

    An existing LIR in this proposal is defined as being an
    organisation which is a full member of APNIC or a full member of
    one of APNIC's NIRs and has already been assigned or allocated
    IPv4 address space.

    Membership of APNIC as an LIR is determined by APNIC's membership
    criteria at the time of application.  Membership of an APNIC NIR
    is determined by each individual NIR's membership criteria at the
    time of application.

4.3 Unforeseen circumstances

    It is proposed that:

    - A /16 is held in reserve for some future uses, as yet
      unforeseen.

      The Internet is a disruptive technology and we cannot predict
      what might happen.  Therefore it is prudent to keep a /16 in
      reserve, just in case some future requirement makes a demand of
      it.

    - In the event that this /16 remains unused in the time the
      remaining /8 covered by this policy proposal has been allocated
      to LIRs, it returns to the pool to be distributed as per clauses
      4.1 and 4.2.


5.  Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
------------------------------------------------

5.1 Advantages

    - APNIC's final /8 worth of address space will have a special
      policy applicable to it.

      This avoids the risk of one or a few organisations consuming the
      entire block with a well crafted and fully justified resource
      application.

    - At APNIC's current minimum allocation size in force at time of
      writing, the proposal ultimately allows for 16384 LIRs (both new
      and existing) to receive exactly one /22 each.

      This is substantially larger than the existing APNIC membership,
      and attempts to ensure that no organisation lacks real routable
      IPv4 address space during the coming transition to IPv6.


5.2 Disadvantages

    - Some organisations may believe and can demonstrate that their
      IPv4 requirements are larger than APNIC's minimum allocation.

      But this final /8 is not intended as a solution to the growth
      needs of a few organisations, but for assisting with the
      transition from IPv4 to IPv6.

    - Some organisations may set up multiple LIR registrations in an
      effort to get more address space than proposed.

      APNIC must be vigilant regarding these, but the authors accept
      that it is hard to ensure complete compliance.  With 16384
      possible allocations feasible from the current minimum
      allocation (at time of writing), this is not envisaged to be a
      major problem.


6.  Effect on APNIC members
---------------------------

This proposal allows APNIC LIRs (existing and new) to receive address
space from the final /8 allocated to APNIC.


7.  Effect on NIRs
------------------

This proposal has no direct impact on the operation of the NIRs, but
as noted in the text above, has direct impact on the ability of NIR
members (existing and new) to receive address space from the final /8
allocated to APNIC.