I find myself behind the ball again when it comes to posting info here on my blog. In the last part of 2009, I authored / co-authored and submitted two policy proposals for consideration to be included in the ARIN NRPM. As you may recall, my previous (and first) attempt at crafting policy was an eventual (and ongoing) success; policy 2008-7: Annual WHOIS POC Validation was adopted last July (although it has yet to be added to the NRPM). To avoid confusion (as much as possible), I will address the two new proposals in their own posts.
This post introduces Policy Proposal 102: Reduce and Simplify IPv4 Initial Allocations. Ted Mittelstaedt and I collaborated on this one, as we did on 2008-7. Specifically; Ted crafted the rational for the proposal, with myself as editor, and I wrote the proposal text, with Ted as my editor.
As I stated in a message during the initial ppml discussion: “The general intent of this policy is to make things easier for very small ISPs while balancing any side effects for the rest of the community.” In another message I explained: “We chose the name because this proposal reduces the minimum allocation and simplifies the NRPM by consolidating the multihomed and non-multihomed sections into one.”
Here is the policy statement:
Modify section 4.2.1.5. Minimum allocation:
In general, ARIN allocates IP address prefixes no longer than /23 to
ISPs. If allocations smaller than /23 are needed, ISPs should request
address space from their upstream provider. When prefixes are
assigned which are longer than /20, they will be from a block reserved
for that purpose whenever that is feasible.And
Replace the contents of section 4.2.2. Initial allocation to ISPs:
4.2.2.1. Use of /24
The efficient utilization of an entire previously allocated /24 from
their upstream ISP.4.2.2.2. Efficient utilization
Demonstrate efficient use of IP address space allocations by providing
appropriate documentation, including assignment histories, showing
their efficient use. ISPs must provide reassignment information on the
entire previously allocated block(s) via SWIP or RWHOIS server for /29
or larger blocks. For blocks smaller than /29 and for internal space,
ISPs should provide utilization data either via SWIP or RWHOIS server
or by using the table format described in Section 4.2.3.7.5.4.2.2.3. Three months
Provide detailed information showing specifically how the initial
allocation will be utilized within three months.4.2.2.4. Renumber and return
ISPs receiving an initial allocation smaller than /20 must agree that
the newly requested IP address space will be used to renumber out of
the current addresses which will be returned to the assigning
organization within 12 months. ISPs receiving an initial allocation
equal to or larger than /20 may wish to renumber out of their
previously allocated space. In this case, an ISP must use the new
prefix to renumber out of that previously allocated block of address
space and must return the space to its upstream provider.4.2.2.5. Replacement initial allocation
Any ISP which has received an initial allocation, or previous
replacement initial allocation, smaller than /20 who wishes to receive
additional address space must request a replacement initial
allocation. To receive a replacement initial allocation, an ISP must
agree to renumber out of and return the existing allocation in it’s
entirety within 12 months of receiving a new allocation and provide
justification for the new allocation as described in section 4.2.4.
In yet another message sent during the discussion on the ppml, I further explained that “one of the primary objectives of this policy is to provide a bit of a safety net for small ISPs who may have limited choices for upstream ISPs” such as “a remote rural WISP who only has access to a singe provider… as we enter a time where IPv4 may very well become monetized to the point that such ISPs will be forced out of business without an allocation from ARIN.” Perhaps as important as the IPv4 addresses that such an ISP would be able to obtain under this policy; receiving an IPv4 allocation would also qualify them for “an IPv6 allocation, which is where real growth must take place in any case.”
If you have questions feel free to leave them here but I also highly encourage you to get involved actively by joining the ppml and voicing your opinions there as well! Especially if you support my proposals! ;)
