Hi, this is a policy currently discussed in the APNIC region. I haven't formed an opinion of my own on this yet, but I think it might be useful to be aware of it. Gert Doering, APWG Chair ----- Forwarded message from Takashi Arano <arano@inetcore.com> ----- X-IronPort-SBRS: 3.5 X-Greylist: delayed 1099 seconds by postgrey-1.21 at kombu.apnic.net; Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:45:27 EST X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2J rev4.2 Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 19:26:35 +0900 To: global-v6@lists.apnic.net From: Takashi Arano <arano@inetcore.com> X-AP-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=6 X-AP-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=6 X-AP-Spam-Score: 0 (notspam) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.15 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 08:40:22 +1000 Subject: [GLOBAL-V6] Fwd: [sig-policy] prop-046: IPv4 countdown policy proposal X-BeenThere: global-v6@lists.apnic.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of new global IPv6 policy development <global-v6.lists.apnic.net> X-AP-Lists: Discussion of new global IPv6 policy development <global-v6.lists.apnic.net> List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6>, <mailto:global-v6-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/global-v6> List-Post: <mailto:global-v6@lists.apnic.net> List-Help: <mailto:global-v6-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6>, <mailto:global-v6-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: global-v6-bounces@lists.apnic.net All, Hello. I will forward our proposal to this mailing list just FYI. It is not an IPv6 policy, though. Regards, Takashi Arano
X-Original-To: arano@inetcore.com Delivered-To: arano@inetcore.com From: "Kenny Huang" <huangk@alum.sinica.edu> To: <sig-policy@apnic.net> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 15:51:34 +0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Thread-Index: AcdEKKt/vRhEhwUHSvaQIKaDUzp1lAAGqTXQ X-AP-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=6 X-AP-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=6 X-AP-Spam-Score: 0 (notspam) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.15 (www dot roaringpenguin dot com slash mimedefang) Cc: Subject: [sig-policy] prop-046: IPv4 countdown policy proposal X-BeenThere: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 List-Id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net> X-AP-Lists: APNIC SIG on resource management policy<sig-policy.lists.apnic.net> List-Unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>,<mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy> List-Post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net> List-Help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>,<mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe> Sender: sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net
Dear SIG members
Yesterday, the proposal "IPv4 countdown policy proposal" was sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 23 in Bali, Indonesia, 26 February - 2 March 2007. You are invited to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list before the meeting.
The proposal's history can be found at:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-046-v001.html
Regards,
Kenny Huang Policy SIG huangk@alum.sinica.edu
prop-046-v001: IPv4 countdown policy proposal
________________________________________________________________________
Co-authors: Toshiyuki Hosaka (JPNIC) Takashi Arano (Intec Netcore, Inc.) Kuniaki Kondo (Atelier Mahoroba) Tomohiro Fujisaki (NTT) Akinori Maemura (JPNIC) Kosuke Ito (IRI Ubitech) Shuji Nakamura (IPv6 Promotion Council) Tomoya Yoshida (NTT Communications) Susumu Sato (JPNIC) Akira Nakagawa (KDDI)
Version: 1
Date: 29 January 2007
SIG: Policy
1. Introduction ----------------
The exhaustion of IPv4 address is approaching round the corner. Geoff Huston's latest projection at Potaroo (as of January 6, 2007) (http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/) draws the date of IANA pool exhaustion as 31st May 2011, and that of RIR pool as 14th July 2012.
Tony Hain projects similar dates based on a different algorithm of his own.
From these data, we may observe that if that the current allocation trend continues, the exhaustion of IPv4 address space is expected to take place as early as within the next five years.
ICANN/IANA and RIRs must co-ordinate with stakeholders to achieve smooth termination of IPv4 address space as the Internet bodies responsible for stable management and distribution of IP number resources.
This proposal provides some ideas as well as concrete examples of the policy that helps IPv4 allocations come to an end with "the minimum confusion" and in "as fair manner as possible".
"Five years at the earliest" is not too far in the future for the exhaustion of IPv4 address space. Assuming the minimum of one year is required for sufficient policy discussions with this proposal as a start, and two years for preparation and transfer by LIRs, we need to start the discussions right at this time.
2. Summary of current problems -------------------------------
Despite the fact that several projections are made on IPv4 address to run out as early as within the next few years, no discussions are taking place on any of the RIR's policy fora including that of APNIC. This section lists possible problems if no policies are defined to prepare for the terminal period of allocations.
2.1 LIR
LIRs currently do not consider IPv4 address exhaustion as an imminent issue in the first place. It is possible that they will finally realize the situation only when impacts of the exhaustion becomes visible as a practical matter, and lead to confusions such as re-addressing their network or making subsequent requests at the last minute in within a limited time frame.
There could also be cases where allocations blocks cannot be allocated to some of the LIRs even though requests are submitted on the same day. Moreover, although it would be necessary for LIRs to announce to their customers that IPv4 address space will not be available for assignments eventually, it is difficult to plan this timing without clear policy for the last phase of allocations.
As new IPv4 address allocations space will no longer be available, LIRs have no choice but to build networks based on IPv6. However, there are risks of trouble if preparations are made from that point in time, as it will lead to premature actions even if some time can be bought by re-addressing and subsequent allocations.
Lastly, using up all available IPv4 address space will disable assignments to services inevitable for co-existence of IPv4 and IPv6 networks, such as the translator service between the two networks, which it may create situation where transfer to IPv6 network will not even be possible.
2.2 RIR/NIR
It is likely that smooth allocations by RIRs/NIRs will be hindered by rush of inquiries during the terminal phase of allocations.
2.3 End users
End users generally receive address assignments from ISPs accompanied with Internet connection service. If an ISP no longer has IPv4 address space available, nor unable to provide IPv6 service, end users will not be able to receive services from that ISP.
Moreover, if the terminal date of allocations remains ambiguous, it may leave end users behind to prepare for IPv6 ready network.
3. Benefits ------------
There will be the following benefits by implementing the policy for IPv4 address exhaustion as proposed on this paper.
3.1 LIR
LIRs will be able to consciously plan their addressing within their networks if the final date of allocations is clearly demonstrated. Keeping a certain amount of unallocated address blocks enables allocations/assignments for "critical infrastructure" after the termination of regular allocations, which will be explained later section in more details.
3.2 RIR/NIR
Announcing the date of terminating allocations in advance and ensuring that all allocations before this date will be made according to the policy at the time enables RIRs/NIRs to make the last allocation without confusions and avoids causing feelings of unfairness among LIRs and end users. In addition, consistent policy applied to all RIRs removes bias towards certain region as well as inter-regional unfairness. The period which IPv6 support is completed becomes clear, therefore, RIRs/NIRs can prepare for this.
3.3 End user
As this proposal enables LIRs to prepare for the terminal period of allocations in advance, it reduces the risk of delays/suspensions of assignments from LIRs to enduers, and end users will be able to continuously receive services from LIRs. As in the case of LIRs, end users will be able to prepare for IPv6 support by the date of allocation termination is clarified. In addition, IPv6 connectivity as well as IPv4 address required during the allocation termination period will be smoothly secured by LIRs preparing for such period.
As listed above, there will be important, notable benefits for stakeholders as a result of this policy. It is therefore necessary to take the following actions to achieve a smooth transfer to IPv6 and prevent causing instability in the Internet as well as;
- start discussions on allocation scheme during the exhaustion period,
- indicate a roadmap to exhaustion after raising awareness on the issue, and
- allow enough time for LIRs to plan timing of addressing of their networks, submit allocation requests, and consider how to switch to IPv6.
4. Proposal -----------
4.1 Principles
As the first step to discuss IPv4 exhaustion planning, we would like to have an agreement(consensus) on the following four principles.
-------------------------------------------------------------------- (1) Global synchronization:
All five RIRs will proceed at the same time for measures on IPv4 address exhaustion.
(2) Some Blocks to be left:
Keep a few /8 stocks instead of distributing all.
(3) Keeping current practices until the last moment :
Maintain the current policy until the last allocation.
(4) Separate discussions on "Recycle" issue :
Recovery of unused address space should be discussed separately --------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Global synchronization:
All RIRs must proceed at the same time to take measures for IPv4 address exhaustion. This is important not only for ensuring fairness for LIRs across the regions, but alsot to prevent confusions such as attempts to receive allocations from an RIR outside their region. The five RIRs should facilitate bottom-up discussions, which should be well coordinated under the leaderships of ICANN ASO and NRO.
(2) Some blocks to be left:
It is not practical to consider that IPv4 address blocks can be allocated to the last piece. It is expected to cause confusions if one party can receive an allocation while the other has to give up, just with a touch of a difference. The best solution to avoid such confusion is to set in advance, a date in which one is able to receive an allocation if requests are submitted before this timeline.
Furthermore, there are few cases where allocations or assignments of IPv4 address space become absolutely necessary in the future. For example, requirements to start a translator service between IPv4 and IPv6 networks should be supported, and there may be some requirements in the future that are beyond our imagination at this current moment.
As such, a date to stop allocations under the current policy should be set/defined so that certain number of IPv4 address blocks will be kept as stocks instead of allocating all blocks without remains.
(3) Maintaining current practices until the last moment :
Allocations should be made based on the current policy until the time to terminate allocations. As the IPv4 Internet has now developed into a social infrastructure supporting large number of businesses, making large changes in the current policy towards conservation within the next one or two years will lead to large-scale confusions, and difficult in the reality.
(4) Separate discussion from "Recycle" issue
Recovering unused allocated/assigned address blocks is an important measure, and in fact, it has already be discussed and implemented in each RIR regions. This issue, however should be considered separately from this proposal as recovery of a few /8 blocks extends the lifetime of IPv4 for less than one year while efforts for the recovery is expected to require substantial time.
4.2 Details of the proposal
This section provides an example of a proposal in case consensus is reached on basic principles introduced in section 4.1.
- Set the date for termination of allocations and the date of announcement
Set the date to terminate allocations as a general rule, and announce it a certain period in advance. Define the date of announcement as "A-date" and the date to terminate allocations as "T-date". The two dates will be set as follows:
A-date (Date of Announcement):
- The day in which the IANA pool becomes less than 30*/8
- RIRs must announce "T-date" on this day, which is defined later
(*) There will be no changes in the policy on A-date
T-date(Date of Termination):
- Exactly two years after A-date
- 10*/8 blocks should remain at T-date, and defined as two years after A-date, based on the current pace of allocations
- It is however possible to move T-date forward at the point where address consumpution exceeds the projections during the course of two years
(*) new allocations/assignments from RIRs should terminate on T-date as a general rule. Allocations or assignments to "critical infrastructure" after T-date should be defined by a separate policy.
A-date is set in order to:
- Allow some grace period and period for networks to be IPv6 ready until the termination of allocations. - Prevent unfairness among LIRs by clarifying the date, such as not being able to receive allocations by a small difference in timing.
The rationale for setting A-date as "when IANA pool becomes less than 30*/8" is as follows:
The rate of allocations from IANA to RIRs after 2000 is as follows.
2000 : 4*/8 2001 : 6*/8 2002 : 4*/8 2003 : 5*/8 2004 : 9*/8 2005 : 13*/8 2006 : 10*/8
Approximately 10*/8 has been allocated annually after 2003, and the consumption is likely to accelerate with rise of the last minute demands. As it is better to keep minimum stocks of address pool at IANA, 30*/8 is set as the threshold value, and allocations should be terminated two years after it reaches the value, which ensures that IANA/RIRs secure the address space for allocations/assignments to critical infrastructure.
4.3 Effect on APNIC members/NIRs
APNIC members are expected to concretely grasp the termination date of allocations and take actions within their organization to prepare for the event.
NIRs will also terminate allocations to its LIRs in line with APNIC. Therefore, NIRs will be required to sufficiently promote and keep the community informed on the date of termination of allocations, just as it is expected of APNIC.
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
_______________________________________________ global-v6 mailing list global-v6@lists.apnic.net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6 ----- End forwarded message ----- Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- Total number of prefixes smaller than registry allocations: 98999 SpaceNet AG Mail: netmaster@Space.Net Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Tel : +49-89-32356-0 D- 80807 Muenchen Fax : +49-89-32356-234