Modify the size of initial IPv6 allocations

Original Language Español Date Published 03/10/2016 Last Modified 27/09/2016
Last Call for Comments Period 23/05/2017 - 07/07/2017 Date Ratified Does not apply Implementation Date Does not apply
Status Last call for comments Download TXT PDF XML DOCX
See other versions 1.0 (compare)

Authors

Name: Jordi Palet Martinez
Email: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
Organization: Consulintel

Proposal Data

Policy Type: LACNIC
Id: LAC-2016-7
Last version: 1
Presented at: LACNIC 27 Presentations:

Summary

When this policy was drafted, “special” organizations which are not strictly ISPs in the “traditional” sense of the term (organizations that might not sell the service to their customers and/or those which are “internal” customers, even if they are different organizations from an administrative point of view) but rather governments, academic networks or other possible similar cases were not taken into consideration.

Because of their size, number of users, extent of their infrastructure, hierarchical and/or geographic structure, infrastructure segmentation for security or other reasons, etc., under the current text of the policy, these organizations might not be able to justify the need for an allocation larger than a /32.

Similarly, traditional ISPs may have structures which use, e.g., dynamic POP, and it does not seem appropriate to request justification of the need for resources based on this type of “measurement.”

Rationale

If interpreted strictly by LACNIC staff, the current text of the policy might create problems when trying to justify special cases of LIRs that are not strictly ISPs as defined in section 1.6. It would therefore seem reasonable to establish a clearer case for LIRs that are not “traditional” ISPs. In these situations, IPv4 networks employ private addressing plus one or more NAT layers (this is why this issue has not previously been seen in IPv4, not even in other regions), something which is not appropriate in the case of IPv6.

This case has already occurred in other regions (e.g., RIPE and ARIN), where certain governments (Spain, Germany, USA) have seen their assignments delayed —even for years— because of a lack of an appropriate policy.

The idea is to prevent this error from happening again and that, instead of lagging behind, the region will be prepared and have a proper policy in place for these cases.

Text

Current text:

4.5.1.3. Initial Allocation Size
Organizations may qualify for an initial allocation larger than a /32 by submitting documentation that justifies the request. In this case, the documentation must address the following considerations:

- The addressing plan must not extend beyond four years, and must take into account the address space needed to serve current customers and services considering the minimum assignments recommended in the policy in force.

- In the case of multiple access points (POP), the addressing plan may specify minimum prefixes for each POP. Each POP's minimum prefix should be within the binary "boundaries" of the IPv6 address (/X, where X is a multiple of 4). However, the block anticipated for each POP must satisfy at least 30% of its current needs.

In order to comply with the requirements mentioned above, the prefix assigned to the ISP must be within the binary "boundaries" of the IP address.

Proposed text:

4.5.1.3. Initial Allocation Size
Organizations may qualify for an initial allocation larger than a /32 by submitting documentation that justifies the request.

In this case, the initial allocation shall be based on the space needed to serve the organization's clients, number of users, extent of its infrastructure, hierarchical and/or geographic structure, infrastructure segmentation for security or other reasons, and the longevity anticipated for the initial allocation.

In order to comply with the requirements mentioned above, the prefix assigned to the ISP must be within the binary "boundaries" of the IP address.

Additional Information

None

Timetable

Immediate implementation

References

https://www.ripe.net/participate/policies/proposals/2015-03

Public Comments by LACNIC Staff

LACNIC STAFF´S IMPACT ANALYSIS - Proposal LAC-2016-7 - version 1

LACNIC Staff's Interpretation of the Proposal
---------------------------------------------
By removing the current text, LACNIC understands it would no longer be a requirement that the addressing plan for initial IPv6 allocations to an ISP not exceed four years. Under the modified policy, it would not be necessary for the block provided for each POP to satisfy at least 30% of current need.
LACNIC understands that the allocation would be based on the new text:

“In this case, the initial allocation shall be based on the space needed to serve the organization's clients, number of users, extent of its infrastructure, hierarchical and/or geographic structure, infrastructure segmentation for security or other reasons, and the longevity anticipated for the initial allocation.

In order to comply with the requirements mentioned above, the prefix assigned to the ISP must be within the binary "boundaries" of the IP address”

Thus, LACNIC interprets that an applicant would be able to receive IPv6 space with no upper size limitation. The request, however, must be justified by the addressing plan within the anticipated time frame.
Implementation of the Proposal

We also understand that by removing the text about the prefix size to be assigned to each POP, LACNIC staff will not be able to analyze the distribution of users in each POP, making it more difficult to analyze the request.

Implementation
---------------
The proposal can be implemented immediately.

Impact of the policy on the registry system and the addressing pool
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal does not involve any modifications to the registry system.