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.APPENDIXES

a. 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

b. 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 HDRatio 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%

c. 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

d. 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.

 IPv4 Block: e.g. 200.7.84/23 
Customer name IP Address Network Prefix
Cliente 1 200.7.84.0 29
Cliente 2 200.7.84.8 27
Cliente 3 200.7.84.40 25
 IPv4 Block: e.g. 200.0.88/24 
Customer name IP Address Network Prefix
Cliente 1 200.0.84.0 29
Cliente 2 200.0.84.8 27
Cliente 3 200.0.84.40 25
 IPv4 Block: e.g. 200.10.62/23 
Customer name IP Address Network Prefix
Cliente 1 200.10.62.0 29
Cliente 2 200.10.62.8 27
Cliente 3 200.10.62.40 25

e. 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 de 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]