[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [sig-policy] prop-046: IPv4 countdown policy proposal
Dear SIG Members,
I can see a couple of issues with this proposal
1) It brings forward the effective IPv4 runout date by up to 2 years.
This has the risk of bringing forward a "last minute rush" on the
remaining IPv4 addresses. While there are many ways that we could signal
to industry players that the time to invest in IPv6 infrastructure is
now, amplifying the levels of uncertainty in IPv4 and inciting a level
of industry panic appears to be counter-productive.
2) It fails to address the issue of requirements for IPv4 addressing
post registry run-out.
Many players have long term requirements for IPv4 and are not in a
position to suddenly switch to IPv6 any time soon. When the registry
runs out (whether by prop-046 or pure run-out), these players will need
to look to the operation of an IPv4 trading market to continue to meet
their IPv4 requirements.
The issue of APNIC's potential role in an IPv4 trading environment needs
to be considered. Whilst there is some work being done on Certificates
in APNIC, there appears to be no current or proposed mechanism to allow
the trading of IPv4 addresses.
Trading will happen! Whilst APNIC is probably not the venue for such
trading, it is well placed to certify the validate trades similar to the
"Titles Office". The alternatives of an 'unofficial' black market
registries appearing is simply untenable.
I do not believe APNIC has really looked in terms of its operational
profile, necessary tools, costs, etc to undertake such a role. I'm of
the view that this is a pretty large agenda of new work for APNIC, and
that time is running out especially if prop-046 becomes policy. We
really should get APNIC to start looking at this role now.
I would like to propose that APNIC conduct a formal study in the
potential characteristics of trading and the role(s) that APNIC could
play in an address trading environment. It would be good if this could
be undertaken this year (2007). Does this proposal for APNIC to
undertake a study require a policy proposal, or is there some other
mechanism to allow this proposal to be adopted?
Kind regards
Nick Hannaford
Telstra Corporation
Nick.hannaford@telstra.net
-----Original Message-----
From: sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net
[mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of Kenny Huang
Sent: Tuesday, 30 January 2007 6:52 PM
To: sig-policy@apnic.net
Subject: [sig-policy] prop-046: IPv4 countdown policy proposal
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
