Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Fwd: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2016-6: Eliminate HD-Ratio from NRPM
owen at delong.com
Wed Jul 27 21:13:04 UTC 2016
To be a bit more clear… ARIN already pretty well eliminated HD ratio from
our IPv6 policies. The community networks policy is a little (never) used
policy that has a vestigial reference to HD-Ratio.
> On Jul 27, 2016, at 02:28 , Ernest <ernest at afrinic.net> wrote:
> FYI - This proposal in the ARIN region could be of interest to us,
> as it seeks to eliminate the HD-ratio from the IPv6 allocation policy.
> Draft Policy ARIN-2016-6: Eliminate HD-Ratio from NRPM
> Date: 26 July 2016
> Problem Statement:
> The HD-Ratio has become an anachronism in the NRPM and some of the
> vestigial references to it create confusion about recommended prefix
> sizes for IPv6 resulting in a belief in the community that ARIN
> the idea of /56s as a unit of measure in IPv6 assignments. While there
> are members of the community that believe a /56 is a reasonable choice,
> ARIN policy has always allowed and still supports /48 prefixes for any
> and all end-sites without need for further justification. More
> restrictive choices are still permitted under policy as well. This
> proposal does not change that, but it attempts to eliminate some
> possible confusion.
> The last remaining vestigial references to HD-Ratio are contained in
> community networks policy (Section 6.5.9). This policy seeks to replace
> 6.5.9 with new text incorporating end user policy by reference (roughly
> equivalent to the original intent of 6.5.9 prior to the more recent
> changes to end-user policy). While this contains a substantial rewrite
> to the Community Networks policy, it will not have any negative impact
> on community networks. It may increase the amount of IPv6 space a
> community network could receive due to the change from HD-Ratio, but
> more than any other similar sized end-user would receive under existing
> Policy statement:
> Replace section 6.5.9 in its entirety as follows:
> 6.5.9 Community Network Assignments
> While community networks would normally be considered to be ISP type
> organizations under existing ARIN criteria, they tend to operate on
> tighter budgets and often depend on volunteer labor. As a result, they
> tend to be much smaller and more communal in their organization rather
> than provider/customer relationships of commercial ISPs. This section
> seeks to provide policy that is more friendly to those environments by
> allowing them to use end-user criteria. 184.108.40.206 Qualification Criteria
> To qualify under this section, a community network must demonstrate to
> ARIN’s satisfaction that it meets the definition of a community network
> under section 2.11 of the NRPM. 220.127.116.11 Receiving Resources
> Once qualified under this section, a community network shall be treated
> as an end-user assignment for all ARIN purposes (both policy and fee
> structure) unless or until the board adopts a specific more favorable
> fee structure for community networks.
> Community networks shall be eligible under this section only for IPv6
> resources and the application process and use of those resources shall
> be governed by the existing end-user policy contained in section 6.5.8
> et. seq.
> Community networks seeking other resources shall remain subject to the
> policies governing those resources independent of their election to use
> this policy for IPv6 resources.
> Delete section 2.8 — This section is non-operative and conflicts with
> the definitions of utilization contained in current policies.
> Delete section 2.9 — This section is no longer operative.
> Delete section 6.7 — This section is no longer applicable.
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
> Anything else
> Originally, I thought this would be an editorial change as the HD-Ratio
> has been unused for several years.
> However, further research revealed that it is still referenced in the
> Community Networks policy which has also gone unused since its
> inception. As a result, I am going to attempt to simultaneously
> the Community Networks policy while preserving its intent and eliminate
> the HD-Ratio from the NRPM.
> I realize that fees are out of scope for policy, however, in this case,
> we are not setting fees. We are addressing in policy which fee
> the given policy should operate under in a manner which does not
> constrain board action on actual fees.
> This is an attempt to preserve the original intent of the Community
> networks policy in a way that may make it less vestigial.
> Alternatively, we could simply delete Section 6.5.9 if that is
> preferred. The primary goal here is to get rid of vestigial
> reference to
> HD-Ratio rather than to get wrapped around the axle on community
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
More information about the RPD