[address-policy-wg] Announcing address resources

John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> writes:

> > Also, if one is required to announce the full prefix within ARIN,
> > doesn't that imply one can't get an allocation for private use where
> > there is no intention to announce publically?

> We do approve requests for private use of IPv6, as long as it is routed
> on private infrastructure in the region.

> > Finally, there does not seem to be much clarity in the term "operating
> > in the ARIN region". Consider a global entity that effectively
> > operates in multiple, if not all regions. Let's assume their primary
> > or legal home is within the ARIN region. Is that enough?

> Yes, as long as they have legal presence and intend to use the allocation 
> in the region, it's fine; the fact that some of it may be used outside the
> region does not prevent allocation.

What does "use the allocation within the region" really mean?

If one addresses devices that physically reside outside of the region,
but also routes to those devices from within the region, does that
count? This is the key question.

You say the "the fact that some of it may be used outside the region
does not prevent allocation." suggests that if some of the devices are
outside of the region, that is OK. But that then does mean that
requestors should be able to justify space based on a combination of
customers that reside "inside" and "outside" the region.

My understanding is that in fact ARIN does not count (in
justifications) addresses that will be used on devices outside of the
region, which would seem to contradict your statement.

Is it in fact that justifications can include equipment that will be
located outside of ARIN's region, or is it actually that all of the
addresses must be used by customers/equipment within the region?

> > Apparently not entirely. I've been told that when providing justification for
> > obtaining IPv6 address space, ARIN only counts usage within the ARIN
> > region. That implies multi-nationals are expected to go to multiple
> > RIRs, and get fragmented address space, something I thought RIR
> > addressing policies were supposed to discourage.

> Correct, they can receive an IPv6 allocation, but it may be smaller 
> than expected if they aren't going to route it all in the ARIN region.  
> We consider global infrastructure and customers as long as a route 
> covering the whole block originates somewhere within the ARIN region 
> in any fashion - publicly, on an extranet, privately, etc.

I don't follow this. If a multi-national has customers spread all
across the world, and uses a single prefix to cover them all, and
uses that prefix within ARIN's region (e.g., by advertising the
aggregate from within the region), is that enough to satisfy ARIN's
requirement that they "route it all in the ARIN region?

> Note that we actually discussed many of these issues with the ARIN 
> community as a result of the presentation you referenced, and this 
> led to Draft Policy ARIN-2013-6 "Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address 
> Space to Out-of-region Requestors" <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2013_6.html>,
> which was discussed at length and then abandoned.  Absent more specific 
> guidance from the community either way on these sorts of issues, we 
> continue to operate as described above.   If you are aware of anyone
> who has had difficulty receiving an IPv6 allocation as a result, please 
> feel free to direct them to me.

I am raising these questions precisely because I have been made aware
of such a situation and have been asked if I can share light on what
is supposed to happen in such cases.

Thomas