1 / 9

Prop-093: Reducing the minimum delegation size for the final /8

Prop-093: Reducing the minimum delegation size for the final /8. Randy Bush, Philip Smith, Andy Linton & Terence Zhang Policy SIG @ APNIC 31 23rd & 24th February 2011 Hong Kong. Introduction.

stephen-navarro
Download Presentation

Prop-093: Reducing the minimum delegation size for the final /8

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Prop-093: Reducing the minimum delegation size for the final /8 Randy Bush, Philip Smith, Andy Linton & Terence Zhang Policy SIG @ APNIC 31 23rd & 24th February 2011 Hong Kong

  2. Introduction • Proposal to change the minimum size of IPv4 delegations to a /24 when the final /8 policy is activated

  3. Current Problem • Current final /8 policy requires networks to meet the requirements for the minimum allocation size currently in place • To justify a /22, an immediate need for a /24 must be demonstrated, with a detailed plan for use of a /23 within a year • This prevents small networks that are multihomed, operating critical infrastructure, or connecting to IXPs, or running IPv6 transition tools such as NAT64 from justifying a need for IPv4 addresses from the final /8

  4. Situation in other RIRs • There is no similar policy or proposal in other regions

  5. Details of the Proposal • The minimum delegation size be set to /24 • The maximum delegation size remains at /22 • An organisation receiving a /24 under this proposal will be able to request more IPv4 address space until they have received a total of a /22 • Delegations under the final /8 policy will be extended to include: • Small multihoming assignments • Internet Exchange Points • Critical infrastructure

  6. Advantages • Proposal allows a greater range of networks to access resources in the final /8 • Extends the maximum possible total of networks benefiting from the final /8 from around 16000 to around 65000 • Widens the assistance available to networks making the transition from IPv4 to IPv6 over the coming years

  7. Disadvantages • No disadvantages are foreseen

  8. Impact on APNIC members and NIRs • This proposal impacts all APNIC members • This proposal has no direct impact on NIRS, but impacts members of NIRs in the same way it impacts APNIC members

  9. Questions?

More Related