Primarily, I believe that it is there to prevent the policy being an incentive for those who have accepted IPv6 despite the fee hurdle from going to nano-allocations just to save money.
The author and I discussed this proposal with a full agreement that it’s an extremely distasteful way to solve the current situation where fees serve as a disincentive to v6 adoption. We do not want this distasteful solution to become a monetary incentive towards using it in cases where it clearly would not be of benefit to the community. Owen > On Oct 11, 2020, at 1:21 PM, Chris Woodfield <[email protected]> wrote: > > Thanks Andrew, and good catch - both Scott and I missed that clause, > obviously. It appears that this is in place in order to meet the stated goal > of this proposal being revenue-neutral for ARIN? If so, it would be great to > clarify so that community members can make a more informed evaluation as to > whether or not to support the clause. If there are other justifications for > the clause’s presence, I’d be interested to hear them. > > Thanks, > > -C > >> On Oct 11, 2020, at 10:24 AM, Andrew Dul <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The current draft policy text disallows returns to lower than a /36, so >> I would say that organization which took a /36 would not be permitted to >> go down to a /40. >> >> "Partial returns of any IPv6 allocation that results in less than a /36 >> of holding are not permitted regardless of the ISP’s current or former >> IPv4 number resource holdings." >> >> Andrew >> >> On 10/9/2020 2:04 PM, Chris Woodfield wrote: >>> Hi Scott, >>> >>> Given that ARIN utilizes a sparse allocation strategy for IPv6 resources >>> (in my organization’s case, we could go from a /32 to a /25 without >>> renumbering), IMO it would not be unreasonable for the allocation to be >>> adjusted down simply by changing the mask and keeping the /36 or /32 >>> unallocated until the sparse allocations are exhausted. Any resources >>> numbered outside the new /40 would need to be renumbered, to be sure, but >>> that’s most likely less work than a complete renumbering. >>> >>> That said, I’ll leave it up to Registration Services to provide a >>> definitive answer. >>> >>> -C >>> >>>> On Fri, 9 Oct 2020, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi All, >>>>> >>>>> I am in favor of this draft, and am curious as to how resource holders >>>>> who were not dissuaded by the fee increase will be impacted by the policy >>>>> change. While they indeed have more address space than /40, they may also >>>>> not need the additional address space. Some might prefer the >>>>> nano-allocation given the lower cost. Will they be required to change >>>>> allocations, and renumber, in order to return to 3x-small status and >>>>> associated rate? >>>>> >>>>> Scott Johnson >>>>> SolarNetOne, Inc. >>>>> AS32639 >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> ARIN-PPML >>>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>>>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). >>>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>>>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> ARIN-PPML >>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). >>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ARIN-PPML >>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). >>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
