ARIN-prop-294: Remove IPv6 End-User Assignment Criteria
Date: 19 November 2020
Proposal Originator: Peter Jin
188.8.131.52 provides several criteria to determine eligibility for an IPv6 initial assignment:
[a] already having an IPv4 assignment [b] IPv6 multihoming [c] actively using 2000 IPv6 addresses [d] actively using 200 /64 subnets [e] 13 active sites [f] justification as to why ISP/LIR addresses cannot be used.
The specific problems with this are:
/48’s are extremely abundant, much more so than IPv4 addresses. Even if everyone in the world had a /48, it would only take up one or more /16’s. It is not necessary to have elgibility criteria for obtaining /48’s; the fees should be enough; everyone in the world obtaining a /48 (or even a /44) would be $250 x 7 billion = $1.75 trillion, which is around 5% of the U.S. GDP.
Criterion [c] can easily be abused. This number can be thought of as very large since hosts only have a few IPv6 addresses assigned to them, however, the nature of subnet routing allows for all 2^80 IP addresses to be used at once (perhaps with a custom TCP/IP stack); see the next point.
Furthermore; there is no clear meaning of “active use” as said within [c] and [d]. Does “active use” mean “assigned to a host”? Assigned to a service? Responds to ICMP echo (on the public Internet)? One of my web apps, “IPv6 Things” (https://www.peterjin.org/wiki/IPv6_Things, https://ipv6-things.srv.peterjin.org) may be considered to have made “active use” of
1 address, if the first meaning is used
42,000 addresses, if the second meaning is used (each of the “things” on that website has its own IPv6 address)
18,446,744,073,709,551,616 addresses, if the third meaning is used
- Remove 184.108.40.206
- Change the first sentence of 220.127.116.11 to “All end-user organizations are eligible to receive an initial assignment of /48.”
Timetable for implementation: Immediate