Policy Block 2: Draft Policy ARIN 2026-2#

Matthew Wilder (Advisory Council; co-drafted with Alicia Trotman)

• Why: This is a proposal to rewrite the entire IPv6 allocation framework from formula-based sizing to documented network plans. If the PM's organization (or its customers) ever requests IPv6 space from ARIN, this changes what "justification" means — it effectively makes IPAM discipline the allocation criterion.
• What: A full revision of NRPM Section 6.5 that replaces rigid sizing calculations, utilization thresholds, and IPv4-dependent qualification with a planning-based evaluation model. Requests must include a network plan identifying typical assignment sizes (/48, /56, /64), the addressing hierarchy, and projected utilization at 1-, 2-, and 5-year horizons. Subsequent allocations require 75% assignment of the prefix units in the 2-year plan plus evidence deployment matched the submitted hierarchy, with ARIN issuing additional space contiguously to protect aggregation. Deployment must begin within 12 months of issuance. Community survey at the meeting: 40% support, 40% oppose, 20% neutral — genuinely contested.
• How: The mechanism shifts review from arithmetic (e.g., the 75%-of-/48s nibble-boundary rules elsewhere in Section 6.5) to evaluating a documented plan: hierarchy, aggregation strategy, and growth projections over defined time horizons, applied consistently to LIR and end-user/PI allocations.
• Where applicable: Applies to ARIN-region IPv6 allocations only, but the shift from formula-based to plan-based justification is a direction other RIRs watch. Broadly applicable to any org requesting space; the open community question — should ARIN require network plans, and does ARIN need to define what a plan is — is where the practical friction will land.