[Following text is to appear in the RIPE Policy document, IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy for the RIPE NCC Service Region if the proposal reaches consensus.]
New:
IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) Assignments:
To qualify for an IPv6 PI address space, an organisation must:
a) not be an IPv6 LIR;
b) demonstrate that it will be multihomed (for example by showing contracts of the peering partners)
c) meet the requirements of the policies described in the RIPE NCC document entitled “Contractual Requirements for Provider Independent Resources Holders in the RIPE NCC Service Region”
The prefix will be assigned by the RIPE NCC directly to the End User Organisations upon a request properly submitted to the RIPE NCC, either directly or through a sponsoring LIR.
The minimum size of the assignment is a /48. Organisations requesting a larger assignment (shorter prefix) must provide documentation justifying the need for additional subnets.
Additional assignments may also be made when there is a technical need demanding this or usage justified. When possible, these further assignments will be made from an adjacent address block.
Assignments will be allocated from a separate 'designated block' to facilitate filtering practices.
The PI assignment cannot be further assigned to other organisations.
a. Arguments Supporting the Proposal
At the moment there is no solution for the End User Organisations which require redundancy in IPv6. This is perceived as a clear barrier for deployment of IPv6 in some organisations. This policy proposal addresses that barrier by means of providing a direct assignment from the RIPE NCC.
All the other regions already have a policy for IPv6 PI address space.
By setting up this policy, we would avoid creating an unfair situation among different regions, and meet the needs of any organisation that required PI address space. All organisations that opt for the IPv6 PI address space will be in an equal position once the community agrees a long-term technical solution and will have to either move to this new solution or become an LIR, if they qualify.
b. Arguments Opposing the Proposal
The possible effect of this proposal is the growth of the global routing table to a level that, together with the existing and forecasted IPv4 routing entries, could create significant issues for operators unless vendors can provide products that address such issues. Even if such technical solutions were found, the proposal could still have a major impact on the cost and/or depreciation period for infrastructure investments.
you are here: RIPE > Policy Development > Policy Proposals
