Hi all,
As I already mention in the previous email, we are working already in the new
version of this policy proposal, for the PDP review phase.
One of the inputs that we got from the NCC is that our text:
5.2.1. a) a) Satisfies the evaluation threshold of past address
utilisation in terms of the number of sites in units of /56 or /48 assignments
(or other size up to /48, depending on what is being assigned to End Sites). To
this end, the HD-Ratio [RFC 3194] is used to determine the utilisation
thresholds.
is that it may create some confusion, because the actual HD-ratio table (10.
Appendix A: HD-Ratio), is only including the calculation referred to /56
(https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-655#10--appendix-a--hd-ratio).
So, to make it more clear, we may just add to the section 10, new
columns/section for the /48 case. An example of HD-ratio calculation, as used
in other RIRs, is available at http://www.lacnic.net/en/web/lacnic/manual-13.
However, we have another alternative, and we will like to get inputs from the
WG about this choice.
The alternative is to remove the HD-ratio for the subsequent allocation, and
base the subsequent allocation criteria in a simpler concept, which is the
utilization of a given % of the existing allocation.
So what do you think about:
5.2.1 Subsequent allocation criteria
Subsequent allocation will be provided when an organisation (i.e. ISP/LIR):
a. Shows utilization of 75% or more of their total addressing space.
or
b. Can justify new needs (which can’t be satisfied within the previous
allocation), according to the initial allocation size criteria as described in
section 5.1.2.
This will mean also removing section 5.8 (HD-Ratio), which is the definition of
HD-Ratio, section 5.2.2 (applied HD-Ratio) which will not be relevant anymore,
the reference to the HD-Ratio in section 5.3 (LIR-to-ISP allocation), and 5.5
(Registration), which are only references, no “normative” issues, and the
Appendix A (section 10, HD-Ratio table).
It seems a complex change, but if you take a look at it, is quite simple.
This has been done already in ARIN: https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six53
(they have a more complex text/criteria)
The point is, if we get the WG feeling that this option is acceptable, we may
go straight in the next document version including this change.
The alternative is to have this text (HD-ratio removal) proposed in a new
policy proposal, once the actual one passes the PDP process. Clearly it is a
longer process, which may take 3 extra months, but if there is consensus to do
it at once, why wait for it?
So please, let’s know your thoughts on this possible improvement to this policy
proposal.
Regards,
Jordi
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.
