Update to the Policy on IPv4 Assignments to End Users

LAC-2018-8-v1 LAC-2018-8-v2 Vs
References:
New
Deleted
Modified
Authors

Name: Jordi Palet Martinez
Email: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
Organization: The IPv6 Company

Name: Jordi Palet Martinez
Email: jordi.palet@consulintel.es
Organization: The IPv6 Company

Summary

Section 2.3.3.4.3 (Applicant Status) of the IPv4 policy on direct assignments by LACNIC to end users assesses different
requirements depending on whether an applicant is a multi-homed end user or planning to become one.
There are several reasons why evaluating this requirement does not make sense:
1) In many cases applicants may need stable addressing but may be unable to use NAT and private addresses, regardless of
their multihoming status, particularly considering current SLA levels.
2) In some cases, multihoming is not a viable option because of the costs involved, particularly in remote areas where a
single provider may be available.
3) The IPv6 policy has long since eliminated the multihoming requirement, so there is no point in including it in the ca
se of IPv4.
This proposal seeks to simplify this evaluation and remove these barriers by unifying the requirements regardless of whe
ther applicants use multihoming.

Section 2.3.3.4.3 (Applicant Status) of the IPv4 policy on direct assignments by LACNIC to end users establishes various
requirements, as well as the need to renumber and return previously received addresses.
In certain cases, the requirement to renumber and return such addresses may not make sense:
(1) Renumbering may not be convenient, and it might be preferable to 'hand over' the resources if both parties agree, wi
th the corresponding changes in the whois database.
2) If the justified need for space is greater than the space currently available and its allocation is possible, the abo
ve allows the recipient of such space to decide whether they would like to receive a single contiguous block, or whether
they would prefer to avoid renumbering by keeping their current block and receiving an additional assignment to complet
e the required space.
This proposal seeks to simplify the requirements and allow these options.

Rationale (Describe the problem you intend to solve)

Having different requirements for IPv4 and for IPv6 seems senseless, particularly considering how technologies and SLA l
evels have improved, meaning that in many cases there may be less need for multihoming.

This simplification is beneficial if both parties agree. Likewise, avoiding renumbering is also beneficial whenever poss
ible.

Current text

Current text:
O 2.3.3.4.3. Applicant Status
In addition, the applicant's multihomed or non-multihomed status also affects the evaluation of the application.
If the applicant is a multi-homed end user or can prove interconnection needs with other autonomous systems:
The size of the minimum IPv4 address assignment to a multihomed end user is a /24, while the maximum is a /21. In order
to qualify for a block, the applicant must also satisfy the following requirements:
o If the user is not yet multihomed but is planning to become multihomed within a six-month window, or if the user is
planning to establish interconnections with other autonomous systems during this window, a detailed justification must
be presented.
o Justify the requested block size according to the utilization rate (section 2.3.3.4.2).
o Agree to renumber all blocks assigned by other ISPs within three months and return them to their original ISPs.
Requests for blocks larger than a /21 must also comply with the additional requirements established for non-multihomed e
nd users as described below.
If the applicant is a non-multihomed end user:
The minimum size of IPv4 assignments to a non-multihomed end user is a /20 block. If their IPv4 addressing needs are low
er than a /20, non-multihomed end users will need to contact their ISPs in order to obtain addresses.
In order to assign a /20 to an end user, the following requirements must also be met:
Have received a minimum assignment of 8 /24 prefixes from its Internet Service Provider.
Agree to renumber out of the previously assigned space within a period of 12 months and return it to its original provid
er. This requirement is mandatory for obtaining the requested /20 prefix. The assigned /20 prefix must be used to renumb
er out of the addressing previously assigned by its provider.
Additional assignments shall follow the policies set forth in Section 2.3.4 applicable to end users.
New text:
o 2.3.3.4.3. Assignment size and procedure
The applicant must justify that the assigned space will be announced from the applicant’s own autonomous system to at le
ast one other autonomous system.
The minimum size of an IPv4 assignment to an end user is a /24 block; the maximum size is a /20, which must be justified
according to the utilization rate (section 2.3.3.4.2).
If a block had already been assigned by a provider and the user wishes to keep this block to avoid renumbering, such blo
ck may be handed over (changing the resource holder in Lacnic’s whois database) provided that both parties agree. If add
itional address space has been justified and its assignment is possible, the recipient may decide whether they prefer to
receive the block that is handed over plus an additional block to complete the total required space, or whether they pr
efer to receive a single block for the total space and proceed to renumber. Should they choose to renumber, the block th
at had been previously assigned must be returned within 6 months.
Additional assignments shall follow the policies set forth in Section 2.3.4 applicable to end users.

Current text:
Text currently included in section 2.3.3.4.3.
New text:
o 2.3.3.4.3. Assignment size and procedure
The applicant must justify that the assigned space will be announced from the applicant’s own autonomous system to at le
ast one other autonomous system.
The minimum size of an IPv4 assignment to an end user is a /24; the maximum size is a /20, which must be justified accor
ding to the utilization rate (section 2.3.3.4.2).
If a block had already been assigned by a provider and the user wishes to keep this block to avoid renumbering, such blo
ck may be handed over, provided that both parties agree (changing the resource holder in LACNIC’s whois database). If ad
ditional address space has been justified and its assignment is possible, the recipient may decide whether they prefer t
o receive the block that is handed over plus an additional block to complete the total required space, or whether they p
refer to receive a single block for the total space and therefore proceed to renumber. Should they choose to renumber, t
he block that had been previously assigned must be returned within 6 months. Exceptionally, this period may be extended
by an additional 6 months if it can be justified that there was not enough time to obtain the required resources and com
plete the renumbering process.
Additional assignments shall follow the policies set forth in Section 2.3.4 applicable to end users.

New text

Current text:
O 2.3.3.4.3. Applicant Status
In addition, the applicant's multihomed or non-multihomed status also affects the evaluation of the application.
If the applicant is a multi-homed end user or can prove interconnection needs with other autonomous systems:
The size of the minimum IPv4 address assignment to a multihomed end user is a /24, while the maximum is a /21. In order
to qualify for a block, the applicant must also satisfy the following requirements:
o If the user is not yet multihomed but is planning to become multihomed within a six-month window, or if the user is
planning to establish interconnections with other autonomous systems during this window, a detailed justification must
be presented.
o Justify the requested block size according to the utilization rate (section 2.3.3.4.2).
o Agree to renumber all blocks assigned by other ISPs within three months and return them to their original ISPs.
Requests for blocks larger than a /21 must also comply with the additional requirements established for non-multihomed e
nd users as described below.
If the applicant is a non-multihomed end user:
The minimum size of IPv4 assignments to a non-multihomed end user is a /20 block. If their IPv4 addressing needs are low
er than a /20, non-multihomed end users will need to contact their ISPs in order to obtain addresses.
In order to assign a /20 to an end user, the following requirements must also be met:
Have received a minimum assignment of 8 /24 prefixes from its Internet Service Provider.
Agree to renumber out of the previously assigned space within a period of 12 months and return it to its original provid
er. This requirement is mandatory for obtaining the requested /20 prefix. The assigned /20 prefix must be used to renumb
er out of the addressing previously assigned by its provider.
Additional assignments shall follow the policies set forth in Section 2.3.4 applicable to end users.
New text:
o 2.3.3.4.3. Assignment size and procedure
The applicant must justify that the assigned space will be announced from the applicant’s own autonomous system to at le
ast one other autonomous system.
The minimum size of an IPv4 assignment to an end user is a /24 block; the maximum size is a /20, which must be justified
according to the utilization rate (section 2.3.3.4.2).
If a block had already been assigned by a provider and the user wishes to keep this block to avoid renumbering, such blo
ck may be handed over (changing the resource holder in Lacnic’s whois database) provided that both parties agree. If add
itional address space has been justified and its assignment is possible, the recipient may decide whether they prefer to
receive the block that is handed over plus an additional block to complete the total required space, or whether they pr
efer to receive a single block for the total space and proceed to renumber. Should they choose to renumber, the block th
at had been previously assigned must be returned within 6 months.
Additional assignments shall follow the policies set forth in Section 2.3.4 applicable to end users.

Current text:
Text currently included in section 2.3.3.4.3.
New text:
o 2.3.3.4.3. Assignment size and procedure
The applicant must justify that the assigned space will be announced from the applicant’s own autonomous system to at le
ast one other autonomous system.
The minimum size of an IPv4 assignment to an end user is a /24; the maximum size is a /20, which must be justified accor
ding to the utilization rate (section 2.3.3.4.2).
If a block had already been assigned by a provider and the user wishes to keep this block to avoid renumbering, such blo
ck may be handed over, provided that both parties agree (changing the resource holder in LACNIC’s whois database). If ad
ditional address space has been justified and its assignment is possible, the recipient may decide whether they prefer t
o receive the block that is handed over plus an additional block to complete the total required space, or whether they p
refer to receive a single block for the total space and therefore proceed to renumber. Should they choose to renumber, t
he block that had been previously assigned must be returned within 6 months. Exceptionally, this period may be extended
by an additional 6 months if it can be justified that there was not enough time to obtain the required resources and com
plete the renumbering process.
Additional assignments shall follow the policies set forth in Section 2.3.4 applicable to end users.

Additional information

For the purpose of LACNIC operations, “hand over” (ceder in the Spanish original) is equivalent to a simplification of t
he transfer process, under which section 2.3.2.18.5 does not apply. In any case, it would not be possible to apply this
section as LACNIC has no resources available for organizations other than new-entrants.

Note: For the purpose of LACNIC operations, ‘hand over’ (ceder in the Spanish original) is equivalent to a simplificatio
n of the transfer process, under which section 2.3.2.18.5 does not apply. In any case, it would not be possible to apply
this section as LACNIC has no resources available for organizations other than new-entrants.

References

Other RIRs do not require multihoming, but simply justifying the need for additional address space.

Policy proposal LAC-2018-9, which reached consensus during LACNIC29, presents a similar scenario, so it would not be rea
sonable for cases that would possibly have a much smaller impact on the routing table not to be accepted as well.