A. APPENDIXES.
Important notes:
The PDF document hosted on this page is the authoritative version of the Policy Manual. The web version is provided to make it easier for readers to quickly browse the different sections of the Manual.
In the event of a conflict between the web version and the pdf version of the Manual, the pdf version shall control.
This document and/or information was originally written in Spanish, the official language of Uruguay, the country where LACNIC is legally incorporated and whose laws and regulations LACNIC must meet. Likewise, unofficial information and/or documents are also written in Spanish, as this is the language in which most of LACNIC's collaborators and officers work and communicate. We do our best to ensure that our translations are reliable and serve as a guide for our non-Spanish-speaking members. However, discrepancies may exist between the translations and the original document and/or information written in Spanish. In this case, the original text written in Spanish will always prevail.
A.1.Appendix 1. List of countries and territories covered by LACNIC.
List of countries and territories within LACNIC’s area of coverage:
Argentina
Aruba
Belize
Bolivia
Bonaire
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Costa Rica
Cuba
Curaçao
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Falkland Islands (Islas Malvinas)
French Guiana
Guatemala
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Mexico
Nicaragua
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Saba
Saint Martin
Saint Eustace
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
Suriname
Trinidad and Tobago
Uruguay
Venezuela
A.2.Appendix 2: HD-Ratio
The HD-Ratio is not intended to replace the traditional utilization measurement that ISPs perform with IPv4 today. Indeed, the HD-Ratio still requires counting the number of assigned objects. The primary value of the HD-Ratio is its usefulness in determining reasonable target utilization threshold values for an address space of a given size. This document uses the HD-Ratio to determine the thresholds at which a given allocation has achieved an acceptable level of utilization and the assignment of additional address space becomes justified.
The utilization threshold T, expressed as a number of individual /48 prefixes to be allocated from IPv6 prefix P, can be calculated as:
T = 2((48-P)*HD)
Thus, the utilization threshold for an organization requesting subsequent allocation of IPv6 address blocks is specified as a function of the prefix size and target HD-ratio. This utilization refers to the allocation of /48s to end sites, and not the utilization of those /48s within those end sites. It is an address allocation utilization ratio and not an address assignment utilization ratio.
In accordance with the recommendations of [RFC 3194], this document adopts an HD-Ratio of 0.94 as the utilization threshold for IPv6 address space allocations.
The following table provides equivalent absolute and percentage address utilization figures for IPv6 prefixes, corresponding to an HD-Ratio of 0.94.
| P | 48 – P | Total /48s | Threshold | Util % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
48 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
100,0% |
|
47 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
95,9% |
|
46 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
92,0% |
|
45 |
3 |
8 |
7 |
88,3% |
|
44 |
4 |
16 |
14 |
84,7% |
|
43 |
5 |
32 |
26 |
81,2% |
|
42 |
6 |
64 |
50 |
77,9% |
|
41 |
7 |
128 |
96 |
74,7% |
|
40 |
8 |
256 |
184 |
71,7% |
|
39 |
9 |
512 |
352 |
68,8% |
|
38 |
10 |
1024 |
676 |
66,0% |
|
37 |
11 |
2048 |
1296 |
63,3% |
|
36 |
12 |
4096 |
2487 |
60,7% |
|
35 |
13 |
8192 |
4771 |
58,2% |
|
34 |
14 |
16384 |
9153 |
55,9% |
|
33 |
15 |
32768 |
17560 |
53,6% |
|
32 |
16 |
65536 |
33689 |
51,4% |
|
31 |
17 |
131072 |
64634 |
49,3% |
|
30 |
18 |
262144 |
124002 |
47,3% |
|
29 |
19 |
524288 |
237901 |
45,4% |
|
28 |
20 |
1048576 |
456419 |
43,5% |
|
27 |
21 |
2097152 |
875653 |
41,8% |
|
26 |
22 |
4194304 |
1679965 |
40,1% |
|
25 |
23 |
8388608 |
3223061 |
38,4% |
|
24 |
24 |
16777216 |
6183533 |
36,9% |
|
23 |
25 |
33554432 |
11863283 |
35,4% |
|
22 |
26 |
67108864 |
22760044 |
33,9% |
|
21 |
27 |
134217728 |
43665787 |
32,5% |
|
20 |
28 |
268435456 |
83774045 |
31,2% |
|
19 |
29 |
536870912 |
160722871 |
29,9% |
|
18 |
30 |
1073741824 |
308351367 |
28,7% |
|
17 |
31 |
2147483648 |
591580804 |
27,5% |
|
16 |
32 |
4294967296 |
1134964479 |
26,4% |
|
15 |
33 |
8589934592 |
2177461403 |
25,3% |
|
14 |
34 |
17179869184 |
4177521189 |
24,3% |
|
13 |
35 |
34359738368 |
8014692369 |
23,3% |
|
12 |
36 |
68719476736 |
15376413635 |
22,4% |
|
11 |
37 |
1,37439E+11 |
29500083768 |
21,5% |
|
10 |
38 |
2,74878E+11 |
56596743751 |
20,6% |
|
9 |
39 |
5,49756E+11 |
108582451102 |
19,8% |
|
8 |
40 |
1,09951E+12 |
208318498661 |
18,9% |
|
7 |
41 |
2,19902E+12 |
399664922315 |
18,2% |
|
6 |
42 |
4,39805E+12 |
766768439460 |
17,4% |
|
5 |
43 |
8,79609E+12 |
1471066903609 |
16,7% |
|
4 |
44 |
1,75922E+13 |
2822283395519 |
16,0% |
A.3.Appendix 3: Additional Report for IP Address Space Allocation
| City | Allocated IP Addresses | Number of Ports | Number of Dial-Up |
|---|---|---|---|
|
City |
Allocated IP Addresses |
Number of Internal Hosts |
Purpose |
A.4.Appendix 4: IPv4 Resources Distribution Report
The purpose of the following spread sheet is to inform to LACNIC the distribution of the IPv4 blocks allocated to your organization. Please, fill in the columns with the requested information. Note that you should only detail the blocks directly allocated by LACNIC or by a NIR (Mexico or Brazil) and those with sub-assignments of blocks equal or larger than a /30 block.
A.5.Appendix 5: Requirements for ASO AC nominees
Address Council Nominations Process
Any individual from the Lacnic region may be nominated in this process, with the exception of staff members of any Regional Internet Registry, members of Lacnic’s Board of Directors, and any individual having the same nationality as one of the ASO/AC members appointed by the Lacnic community and currently in office.
Self-nominations are allowed.
In order to be accepted, candidates must state that they are aware of Lacnic’s policy development process, the role of the ASO AC, and the mechanisms through which the community can participate in these processes.
If the deadline for submission of candidates expires and no candidate meeting all the requirements above has been nominated, a new 15-day nominations period will be announced during which the restriction regarding candidates’ country of origin shall not apply.
Should a member of the ASO AC be elected to Lacnic’s Board of Directors, said member shall resign from the ASO AC before taking office on the Board.
B. REFERENCES
[RFC 1112] “Host extensions for IP multicasting” S.E. Deering 08/1989 RFC 1112.
[RFC 1466] “Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space” E. Gerich 05/1993 RFC 1466.
[RFC 1518] “An Architecture for IP Address Allocation with CIDR”, Y. Rekhter and T. Li 09/1993 RFC 1518.
[RFC 1519] “Classless Inter−Domain Routing (CIDR): an Address Assignment and Aggregation Strategy”, V. Fuller, T. Li, J. Yu, and K. Varadham, 09/1993 RFC 1519.
[RFC 1715] "The H Ratio for Address Assignment Efficiency", C. Huitema. November 1994, RFC 1715.
[RFC 1918] “Address Allocation for Private Internets”, Y. Rekhter , D. Karrenberg , R. Moskowitz , G. de Groot , and E. Lear 02/1996 RFC 1918.
[RFC 1930] “Guidelines for creation, selection and registration of an Autonomous System (AS)”, J. Hawkinson 03/1996 RFC 1930.
[RFC 2050] “Internet Registry IP Allocation Guidelines”, K. Hubbard, M. Kosters, D. Conrad, D. Karrenberg, J. Postel 11/1996 RFC 2050.
[RFC 2317] “Classless IN−ADDR.ARPA delegation”, H. Eidnes, G. de Groot, P. Vixie 03/1998 RFC 2317
[RFC 2373] "IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture", R. Hinden, S. Deering. July 1998, RFC 2373.
[RFC 2373bis] http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3-07.txt
[RFC 2928] "Initial IPv6 Sub TLA ID Assignments", R. Hinden, S. Deering, R. Fink, T. Hain. September 2000, RFC 2928.
[RFC 3177] "IAB/IESG Recommendations on IPv6 Address". IAB, IESG. September 2001, RFC 3177.
[RFC 3194] "The H Density Ratio for Address Assignment Efficiency An Update on the H ratio", A. Durand, C. Huitema. November 2001, RFC 3194.
[RFC 4893] “BGP Support for Four-octet AS Number Space”, Q. Vohra, E. Chen 05/2007
RFC 4893.
[IAB Request] "Email from IAB to IANA",
http://www.iab.org/iab/DOCUMENTS/IPv6addressspace.txt
[RIRs on 48] http://www.arin.net/policy/ipv6reassign.html
[RIRv6 Policies]
http://www.apnic.net/policy/ipv6-address-policy.html
https://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/afpol-v6200407-000.htm