Support as written. Great work everyone on this! -C
> On Sep 26, 2017, at 10:31 AM, ARIN <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 21 September 2017, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) advanced the following > Draft Policy to Recommended Draft Policy status: > > ARIN-2017-5: Improved IPv6 Registration Requirements > > The text of the Recommended Draft Policy is below, and may also be found at: > > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2017_5.html > > You are encouraged to discuss all Recommended Draft Policies on PPML > prior to their presentation at the next ARIN Public Policy and Members > Meeting. PPML and PPC discussions are invaluable to the AC when > determining community consensus. > > 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) > > > > AC's Statement of Conformance with ARIN's Principles of Internet Number > Resource Policy: > > This proposal is technically sound and enables fair and impartial number > policy for easier IPv6 Registrations. The staff and legal review noted a > single clarification issue which has been addressed. There is ample support > for the proposal on PPML and no concerns have been raised by the community > regarding the proposal. > > 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 > "assignment containing a /64 or more addresses" and change to "re-allocation, > reassignment containing a /47 or more addresses, or subdelegation of any size > that will be individually announced," > > and > > 2) Alter section 6.5.5.2. "Assignments visible within 7 days" of the NRPM to > strike the text "4.2.3.7.1" and change to "6.5.5.1" > > and > > 3) Alter section 6.5.5.3.1. "Residential Customer Privacy" of the NRPM by > deleting the phrase "holding /64 and larger blocks" > > and > > 4) Add new section 6.5.5.4 "Registration Requested by Recipient" of the NRPM, > to read: "If the downstream recipient of a static assignment of /64 or more > addresses requests publishing of that assignment in ARIN's registration > database, the ISP should register that assignment as described in section > 6.5.5.1." > > 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 admi nistrative 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. > _______________________________________________ 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.
