Provider Independent (PI) IPv6 Assignments for End User Organisations
This policy proposal has been accepted
- State:
- Accepted
- Publication date
- Affects
- Draft document
- Draft
- Author
- Proposal Version
- 5.0 - 09 Feb 2009
- All Versions
-
- Accepted
- 10 Apr 2009
- Working Group
- Address Policy Working Group
- Proposal type
-
- New
- Policy term
- Permanent
This proposal introduced a solution for organisations that needed IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) address space.
Summary of Proposal:
This proposal introduces a solution for organisations that need IPv6 Provider Independent (PI) address space.
Rationale:
a. Arguments Supporting the Proposal
Currently, there is no solution for End User organisations that require redundancy in IPv6. This is perceived as a clear barrier to deployment of IPv6 in some organisations. This policy proposal aims to solve this problem by means of providing a direct assignment from the RIPE NCC.
The other four RIR regions already have a policy for assigning 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 from the five RIR regions that opt for the IPv6 PI address space will be in an equal position once the community agrees a long-term technical solution. These organisations 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 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.
Additional Information:
Note: In order to provide additional information related to the proposal, details of an impact analysis carried out by the RIPE NCC are documented below. The projections presented in this analysis are based on existing data and should be viewed only as an indication of the possible impact that the policy may have if the proposal is accepted and implemented.
A. Impact of Policy on Registry and Addressing System
Address/Internet Number Resource Consumption:
We assumed that one immediate potential possibility that the proposal could bring if it were to become a policy would be for all existing IPv4 PI holders to request a /48 for each IPv4 prefix they have. At the time this analysis was carried out, there were approximately 22,000 objects with the status ASSIGNED PI in the RIPE Database [1]. 22,000 /48s resolve into a little over a /34 and a /36 of IPv6 address space.
Fragmentation/Aggregation:
The introduction of this policy would increase the number of entries in the routing table, simply because the proposal is for assignment of new IPv6 prefixes.
Currently, the IPv6 tables collected by Routing Information Service (RIS) contain approximately 2,000 ROUTE6 object entries [2].
At the time this analysis was carried out, there were approximately 22,000 objects with the status ASSIGNED PI in the RIPE Database [1]. Again, we assumed that one immediate potential possibility could be for all existing IPv4 PI holders to request and route a /48 for each IPv4 prefix they have. In that case, the routing tables would increase by a factor of 10 compared to today's size.
In the short term (up to one year), the impact of already existing IPv6 PI policies in other regions suggests a rather limited increase in routing table entries:
- ARIN started with IPv6 PI in September 2006. To date, the stats files contain less than 200 IPv6 assignments from 2620::/23. [3]
- APNIC is making "Portable IPv6" assignments since June 2007. The stats files report only 36 entries under 2001:df0::/29. [4]
Although regional differences certainly exist, it seems unlikely that the RIPE NCC would assign thousands of IPv6 assignments in the first years.
B. Impact of Policy on RIPE NCC Operations/Services
Although it is thought to be unlikely, there is still the possibility that if the proposal 2006-01 is accepted and it is implemented as a policy, the RIPE NCC would receive a large number of requests under this new policy in a very short time. Should this occur, the RIPE NCC will attempt to minimise the impact on its service level by evaluating the requests under this new policy in a separate queue from other requests. This might delay the evaluation of requests for IPv6 PI space slightly, but it will ensure prompt evaluation of all other requests.
References:
[1] ftp://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/ripencc/delegated-ripencc-latest
[2] The UNIX command "whois -M -h riswhois.ripe.net 0::0/0 |grep route6 |sort |uniq -c |wc" reports 1,858 unique IPv6 prefixes on 26 January 2009.
[3] ftp://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/arin/delegated-arin-latest
[4] ftp://ftp.ripe.net/pub/stats/apnic/delegated-apnic-latest