I support what I think is the intent, but I have language/editorial nits; 1. In 3) below; Which is it "a /64 or more addresses" or "regardless of size" that requires registration? I think logically we need one or the other, or some qualification on "regardless of size" statement. I think it is a good idea to not require registration of less than a /64. But the current language seems contradictory, and therefore confusing, my recommendation is delete "regardless of size", from the sentence and leaving "a /64 or more addresses". I pretty sure we don't want people having an expectation that they can request the registration of "their" /128 address.
2. Also in 3) below; It would seem to require even dynamic assignments be registered if requested, I don't think that is our intent either, section 6.5.5.1 starts with "Each static IPv6 assignment containing", this needs a similar qualification. Also, I'm fine with the deltas in the policy statement but it would be helpful to see the final resulting policy block, maybe in a separate email so we can all see how the result reads. Thanks, I think we are getting close, maybe one or two more turns of the crank. On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 12:06 PM, ARIN <[email protected]> wrote: > The following has been revised: > > * Draft Policy ARIN-2017-5: Equalization of Assignment Registration > requirements between IPv4 and IPv6 > > Revised text is below and can be found at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_5.html > > You are encouraged to discuss all Draft Policies on PPML. The AC will > evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance of this draft > policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet number resource policy as stated > in the Policy Development Process (PDP). Specifically, these principles are: > > * Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration > * Technically Sound > * Supported by the Community > > The PDP can be found at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html > > Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at: > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html > > Regards, > > Sean Hopkins > Policy Analyst > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > > > Problem Statement: > > Current ARIN policy has different WHOIS directory registration > requirements for IPv4 vs IPv6 address assignments. IPv4 registration is > triggered for an assignment of any address block equal to or greater than a > /29 (i.e., eight IPv4 addresses). In the case of IPv6, registration occurs > for an assignment of any block equal to or greater than a /64, which > constitutes one entire IPv6 subnet and is the minimum block size for an > allocation. Accordingly, there is a significant disparity between IPv4 and > IPv6 WHOIS registration thresholds in the case of assignments, resulting in > more work in the case of IPv6 than is the case for IPv4. There is no > technical or policy rationale for the disparity, which could serve as a > deterrent to more rapid IPv6 adoption. The purpose of this proposal is to > eliminate the disparity and corresponding adverse consequences. > > Policy statement: > > 1) Alter section 6.5.5.1 "Reassignment information" of the NRPM to strike > "/64 or more addresses" and change to "/47 or more addresses, or > subdelegation of any size that will be individually announced," > > and > > 2) Alter section 6.5.5.3.1. "Residential Customer Privacy" of the NRPM by > deleting the phrase "holding /64 and larger blocks" > > and > > 3) Add new section 6.5.5.4 "Downstream Registration Requests" to the NRPM > that reads "If the downstream recipient of a netblock ( a /64 or more > addresses) requests publishing in ARIN's registration database, the ISP > must register the netblock, regardless of size." > > Comments: > > a. Timetable for implementation: Policy should be adopted as soon as > possible. > > b. Anything else: > > Author Comments: > > IPv6 should not be more burdensome than the equivalent IPv4 network size. > Currently, assignments of /29 or more of IPv4 space (8 addresses) require > registration. The greatest majority of ISP customers who have assignments > of IPv4 space are of a single IPv4 address which do not trigger any ARIN > registration requirement when using IPv4. This is NOT true when these same > exact customers use IPv6, as assignments of /64 or more of IPv6 space > require registration. Beginning with RFC 3177, it has been standard > practice to assign a minimum assignment of /64 to every customer end user > site, and less is never used. This means that ALL IPv6 assignments, > including those customers that only use a single IPv4 address must be > registered with ARIN if they are given the minimum assignment of /64 of > IPv6 space. This additional effort may prevent ISP's from giving IPv6 > addresses because of the additional expense of registering those addresses > with ARIN, which is not required for IPv4. The administrative burden of > 100% customer registration of IPv6 customers is unreasonable, when such is > not required for those customers receiving only IPv4 connections. > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:[email protected] Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
