<NOTE> | This draft is an archived version. Click here to check the latest draft/version
Details
| Details |
|
Proposal
1.0 Summary of the Problem Being Addressed by this Policy Proposal
The soft-landing policy ratified by the board on the 11/11/2011 describes how AFRINIC should manage allocations/assignments from the last /8. It defines 2 phases for the IPv4 exhaustion. During phase 1, it sets the maximum to be /13 instead of /10 and in phase 2, the maximum to /22 and the minimum to /24. It makes no difference between existing LIRs or End-Users and new ones. The policy also does not impose IPv6 deployment.
IPv4 exhaustion in other regions combined with other factors has imposed huge pressure on the AFRINIC IPv4 pool with requests for large IPv4 blocks, with very little IPv6 deployment. The pressure on the AFRINIC IPv4 pool has led to some policy proposals to reserve some blocks for certain sub-communities.
2.0 Summary of How this Proposal Addresses the Problem
This policy proposal solves the problem described above by:
- Changing the value of the maximum of allocations/assignment size during the exhaustion phase 1
- Removing minimum allocation size as this may evolve over time during the exhaustion period
- Reserving a dedicated block to facilitate IPv6 deployment
3.0 The Proposal
3.1 Policy Manual section to be affected:
Section 5.4 of the CPM will be replaced as follows:
5.4 Soft Landing
This proposal describes how AFRINIC shall assign, allocate, and manage IPv4 resources during the "Exhaustion Phase" which begins when AFRINIC first needs to assign or allocate IP addresses from the Final /8 block of IPv4 address space.
5.4.1 Definitions
- Local Internet Registry (LIR) - A Local Internet Registry (LIR) is an Internet Registry (IR) that receives allocations from an RIR and assigns address space to customers who use its services. LIRs are generally ISPs and their customers are end-users and possibly other ISPs. LIRs must be members of an RIR like AFRINIC; which serves the Africa Region and part of the Indian Ocean (Comoros, Madagascar, Mauritius, and Seychelles).
- Existing LIR's - An Existing LIR is a LIR that assigns address space to 'end-users' and has already been allocated IPv4 address space by AFRINIC.
- New LIR - A New LIR, is a LIR that assigns address space to 'end-users' and is a member of AFRINIC, but has not been allocated any IPv4 address space prior to the Exhaustion phase.
- Existing “End User” - An “End User” is an organisation that has already been assigned IPv4 space by AFRINIC for use in its operational networks.
- New “End User” - A new “End User” is an End User who is member of AFRINIC, but has not been assigned any IPv4 address space prior to the Exhaustion phase.
- Final /8 block of IPv4 address space, or "Final /8" - The Final /8 block of IPv4 address space, or "Final /8", is the /8 block of IPv4 address space that has been allocated by the IANA to AFRINIC in terms of section 2.2 C of the Global Policy for the Allocation of the Remaining IPv4 Address Space
- Core DNS service provider: A core DNS service provider is an organisation that provides DNS service for the root level of the DNS tree (ICANN-sanctioned root operators) or for an ICANN-sanctioned African ccTLD operating in AFRINIC service Region.
5.4.2 Pre-Exhaustion Phase
The "Pre-Exhaustion phase" was the period during which AFRINIC allocated or assigned IPv4 addresses to LIRs and End Users using the section 5.0 of the policy manual and before the Exhaustion phase was triggered.
This phase ended when AFRINIC publicly announced that the Exhaustion Phase has begun.
5.4.3 Exhaustion Phase
During the Exhaustion Phase, the following allocation and assignment policy will be used. This policy applies to both LIRs and End Users, and applies to all IPv4 address space allocated, assigned, or otherwise managed by AFRINIC during the transition to and after the beginning of the Exhaustion Phase, regardless of whether or not such IPv4 address space is a part of the Final /8. The exhaustion phase will be divided into two parts:
5.4.3.1 Exhaustion Phase 1
- During this phase, allocation/assignment of address space will continue as in the Pre-Exhaustion with no explicit minimum but the maximum will change from /10 to /18.
- Allocations and assignments will be made from the Final /8 or from any other IPv4 address space available to AFRINIC, until no more than a /11 of non-reserved space is available in the Final /8. At this point, the exhaustion phase 2 will begin.
- For the avoidance of doubt, all applications in the process at this point will be evaluated as per the new policy
5.4.3.2 Exhaustion Phase 2
- During this phase the maximum allocation/assignment size will be /22.
- There is no explicit limit on the number of times an organisation may request additional IPv4 address space during the Exhaustion Period
5.4.4 The allocation and assignment period shall be of 8 months.
The allocation and assignment period shall be of 8 months. This will help to ensure that LIRs request only for resources they need in the short to medium term, and promote fairness in the equitable distribution of the last IPv4 address pool. This allocation/assignment period will remain the same throughout the lifespan of this Policy
5.4.5 Allocation Criteria
- In order to receive IPv4 allocations or assignments during the Exhaustion Phase, the LIR or End User must meet IPv4 allocations or assignment policies requirements and have used at least 90% of all previous allocations or assignments (including those made during both the Pre-Exhaustion and the Exhaustion Phase).
- In the case of new LIRs or End Users with no previous allocations or assignments, this requirement does not apply to their first allocation or assignment request.
- AFRINIC resources are for AFRINIC service region and any use outside the region should be solely in support of connectivity back to the AFRINIC region
5.4.6 IPv6 deployment reserve
A contiguous /12 IPv4 address block will be reserved out of the Final /8 to facilitate IPv6 deployment. When AFRINIC, can no longer meet any more requests for address space (from the Final /8 or from any other available address space), allocations and assignments from this block must be justified by needs for IPv4 addresses space to support IPv6 deployment. Examples of such needs include: [IPv4 addresses for Core DNS service providers dual stack DNS servers, 464XLAT translators or any other translators as defined by the IETF. This block will be subject to a maximum size allocation of /24.
AFRINIC staff will use their discretion when evaluating justifications and should use sparse allocation when possible within that /12 block.
In order to receive an allocation or assignment from the IPv6 deployment reserve:
- The applicant may not have received resources under this policy in the preceding six (6) months;
- The applicant must demonstrate that no other allocations or assignments will meet this need.
4.0 Revision History
|
09 FEB 2016 |
AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT01 (Version 1.0) Version 1 posted to the rpd mailing list |
|
16 FEB 2016 |
AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT02 (Version 2.0): |
|
22 JUL 2016 |
AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT03 (Version 3.0): Maximum Allocation/Assignment size changed from /15 to /18 in phase 1 as per discussions at AFRINC-24 public policy meeting and follow-on discussions on RPD. |
|
14 APR 2017 |
AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT04 (Version 4.0)
|
5.0 References
Global Policy for the Allocation of the remaining IPv4 address pool: http://www.AFRINIC.net/en/library/policies/135-afpub-2009-v4-001
Staff Assessment
*** Staff Assessment ***
| Proposal | AFPUB-2016-V4-001-DRAFT-04 |
|---|---|
| Title | IPv4 Soft Landing BIS |
| Assessed | 15 May 2017 |
1.0 Staff Understanding the Proposal
- Complete replacement for the current IPv4 Soft Landing policy (replaces entire CPM 5.4)
- The policy makes resource provisions for new LIRs and End-Users, something lacking in current CPM 5.4.
- Creates a reserved & dedicated (IPv4 /12) block for companies needing IPv4 space to support IPv6 deployment.
- Introduces new values for the maximum allocations/assignment sizes: Removes minimum allocation/assignment sizes stipulated in CPM 5.4. Removes minimum allocation/assignment sizes stipulated in CPM 5.4.
- Phase 1: Maximum /18, no minimum (implies minimum /32)
- Phase 2: Maximum /22, no minimum (implies minimum /32)
- Removes minimum allocation/assignment sizes stipulated in CPM 5.4.
2.0 Staff Comments
-
The definition of "exhaustion phase" is not clear. The current soft landing policy defines it, but the definition would be deleted if this proposal is passed, and that would leave us without a good definition.
-
HTML links should be expanded to be visible in text versions or printed versions of the proposal
-
In the introduction to 5.4, the existing policy has three paragraphs and the new one has one paragraph. There is no explanation for why the additional information was removed.
-
In 5.4.1 "Definitions", why do we have a definition of LIR that is different from the one in CPM 2.3? We would prefer to see all (general) definitions in section 2 of the CPM - unless they are explicitly specified to the soft-landing section of the CPM.
-
The definitions of "existing LIR" and "existing end user" are not clear. It appears authors meant to refer to members who joined AFRINIC and received address space before the exhaustion phase started. In any case, the remainder of the policy does not use these definitions, so the definitions could be deleted.
-
The definition of "new LIR" and "new end user" means that somebody who joins today will be classified as "new" and they will remain as "new" forever. Is that the authors' intent? In any case, the definition is used only once, in 5.4.5. There's no need for a definition if the text in 5.4.5 is written carefully.
-
In the definition of final /8, we suggest that authors could specify that it's 102.0.0.0/8.
-
In 5.4.2 - note that the term "Current phase" from the old soft landing policy is being renamed to "Pre-exhaustion phase". The name "pre-exhaustion phase" is better, but we note that some other documents might need to be edited to take the change into account.
-
In 5.4.3.1, for consistency, please explicitly say IPv4 in "allocation/assignment of IPv4 address space"
-
In 5.4.3.1 "allocation/assignment of address space will continue as in the Pre-Exhaustion ". We understand that existing requirements for justified need will remain. We suggest clarifying this, and lifting it from 5.4.3.1 to 5.4.3, so it applies to all phases. The text in 5.4.5 "must meet IPv4 allocations or assignment policies requirements" also implies justified need, but again it could be made more clear.
-
In 4.5.3.1 "no explicit minimum" is a change from the old soft landing policy. "No explicit minimum" implies that the minimum will be /32, but staff would prefer to retain a minimum of /24. Allocation or assignment of blocks smaller than /24 will cause operational difficulties for staff (as well as on the internet in general) and will require software changes.
-
In 5.4.3.2, authors should state when phase 2 begins. Currently, the start of phase 2 is implied by one of the bullet points under 5.4.3.1, but it would be better if 5.4.3.2 explicitly stated the conditions for phase 2 to begin.
-
In 5.4.3.1 "For the avoidance of doubt all applications in the process at this point will be evaluated as per the new policy". This should probably apply to the beginning of phase 2 as well as to the beginning of phase 1.
-
In 5.4.3.2 "There is no explicit limit on the number of times an organisation may request additional IPv4 address space during the Exhaustion Period". Please clarify whether this applies only to phase 2, or also phase 1. Staff are concerned about the possible increase in workload caused by repeated small requests from the same member and suggest that some method of rate limiting should be added, such as a limit to the number of requests per year.
-
5.4.6 reserves a /12 to facilitate IPv6 deployment. What happens to the /12 that was reserved by the old soft landing policy for "some future uses, as yet unforeseen"? We think that the old reservation is cancelled and the new reservation replaces it, but we would like clarity. We also understand that the reserved space would not be touched until no other space is available at all, and if address space is subsequently returned to AFRINIC (after the reserve starts being used) then the returned space would be handled under the rules of Phase 2.
-
In 5.4.6, "AFRINIC staff will use their discretion when evaluating justifications and should use sparse allocation when possible within that /12 block." Please separate these two very different ideas into at least two sentences, but preferably two separate numbered sub-sections.
-
Authors are generally advised to use numbered sections instead of bullet lists, for ease of reference in future discussion or correspondence.
-
Authors are also advised to generally make an effort to keep the numbering in the new proposed policy aligned with the numbering in the current policy in the CPM.
3.0 Comments from Legal Counsel
- None observed.
4.0 Implementation:
4.1 Timeline & Impact
The proposal can be implemented as written without significant impact to AFRINIC resources within the timeline recommended by the PDP.
4.2 Implementation Requirements
The following work shall be required from IT:
- Codification of new minimum and maximum allocation sizes in MyAFRINIC and whois
- Revision of Resource Request forms (in MyAFRINIC and NMRP)
