arin xvi los angeles october 2005
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Policy Proposal 2005-8 to amend ARIN IPv6 assignment and utilization requirements

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 10

Policy Proposal 2005-8 to amend ARIN IPv6 assignment and utilization requirements - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 132 Views
  • Uploaded on

ARIN XVI Los Angeles October 2005. Policy Proposal 2005-8 to amend ARIN IPv6 assignment and utilization requirements. RFC3177. IETF IESG/IAB recommendations: IPv6 address assignments should be /128, /64 or /48 /64 when one (and only one) subnet /48 for most, including home users

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Policy Proposal 2005-8 to amend ARIN IPv6 assignment and utilization requirements' - symona


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
arin xvi los angeles october 2005
ARIN XVI

Los Angeles

October 2005

Policy Proposal 2005-8to amend ARIN IPv6 assignment and utilization requirements
rfc3177
RFC3177
  • IETF IESG/IAB recommendations:
    • IPv6 address assignments should be /128, /64 or /48
    • /64 when one (and only one) subnet
    • /48 for most, including home users
  • RIRs co-operated to create one “globally coordinated IPv6 policy”
    • Incorporated the RFC3177 recommendations
geoff huston s analysis
Geoff Huston’s Analysis
  • Concern over early rate of IPv6 allocation
    • Already large allocations (/19 & /20)
  • Did data analysis on real RIR allocations
    • Projected IPv6 prefix usage out 60 years
      • With current /48 policy and HD ratio of 0.8
    • Showed possible consumption of /1 to /4
  • Presented at ARIN XV and RIPE50
    • Suggestions to increase expected lifetime:
      • /56 assignments
      • HD ratio 0.94
why change now
Why Change Now?
  • Fairness to the future
    • Don\'t repeat the IPv4 early adopter “bonus”
    • Address space is critical, global, public resource – must be managed prudently
      • WSIS/WGIG, Government interest, ...
  • Heavy inertia for future change
    • Networked devices in the billions?
    • Leave enough addresses for the next generation
    • Develop a survivable allocation model
how we got here
How We Got Here
  • Feedback from ARIN XV and RIPE50 to pursue ideas
  • Geoff Huston wrote APNIC policy proposal
  • Similar proposal submitted to RIPE
  • Similar proposal submitted to ARIN
    • Became 2005-8 (this proposal)
    • 2005-5: IPv6 HD ratio
  • RFC 3177bis submitted to IETF
rfc 3177bis
RFC 3177bis
  • draft-narten-ipv6-3177bis-boundary-00.txt
  • Revisit the RFC 3177 recommendations
  • Verify that there are no architectural issues with moving /48 to something else (i.e., /48 is just policy)
  • Adopted as WG document by IPv6 WG
  • No substantative architectural issues identified
apnic ripe feedback
APNIC/RIPE Feedback
  • Presented at recent APNIC and RIPE
    • Concern for impact on already-assigned /48s
    • Unclear effect on utilization measurements
  • Pushback from LIRs
    • LIRs should themselves determine assignment size
    • Should just do CIDR for end sites
  • No consensus: continued analysis
    • Looking for the appropriate density metric (when LIR needs more space, what is metric?)
if lirs determine assignment size
If LIRs Determine Assignment Size?
  • Who defines best practices?
    • Reverse delegation on nibble boundaries?
    • Same assignment size if changing providers?
    • Assurance that end sites can easily obtain an adequate number of subnets?
  • Address space is a public resource
    • With IPv6, need a serious mind set change
      • There is an abundance of address space
      • A simple request should be sufficient justification
concerns
Concerns
  • Creating incentives that ensure good balance between waste and stinginess?
    • Want smaller assignments to small end sites
    • Don\'t want, e.g., home users locked into /64 forever!!!
  • Subnets everywhere!
    • Even cell phones will be routers
  • Global co-ordination (again?)
    • This should be a uniform policy across RIRs
discussion
Discussion???
  • What we are trying accomplish?
    • Less waste
      • Smaller assignments to small end sites
    • Provide encouragement for generous assignments
    • Not make addresses an “expensive” commodity in IPv6
      • limit cost to ISP/LIR relative to assignment size
  • Are we on the right track?
ad