[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [sig-policy] Final call for comments: [prop-021-v001] "Expansionof the initialallocation space for existing IPv6 address space holders"
Dear secretariat and all,
I am not sure what "subsequent allocation criteria." means or is exactly.
Is there a definitive written description?
APNIC Secretariat wrote:
> Dear colleagues
>
> APNIC welcomes comments, questions, and suggestions on the following
> policy proposal:
>
> ____________________
>
> Final call for comments: [prop-021-v001]
> "Expansion of the initial allocation space for existing IPv6 address
> space holders"
> ____________________
>
> This is the final call for comments on policy proposal [prop-021-v001]
> "Expansion of the initial allocation space for existing IPv6 address
> space holders". This is a proposal to allow existing IPv6 address
> holders to expand their initial allocation, using their existing IPv4
> infrastructure to justify an allocation larger than a /32. The use of
> IPv4 infrastructure to justify a larger initial allocation was passed
> at APNIC 17 [prop-016-v002]. This current proposal allows networks
> that received an initial allocation before prop-0160-v001 to be given
> the same opportunity to recieve an initial allcoation greater than /32.
>
> This proposal was presented at APNIC 18 and the following consensus was
> reached:
>
> "to implement the proposal to expand IPv6 address space holdings
> for existing users without satisfying the subsequent allocation
> criteria."
>
> This proposal is now submitted to the sig-policy mailing list for an
> eight week discussion period. At the end of that period, if consensus
> appears to have been achieved, the Chair of the Policy SIG will
> ask the Executive Council to endorse the proposal for implementation.
>
> * Send all comments and questions to: <sig-policy@apnic.net>
> * Deadline for comments: 12 November 2004
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> Proposal details
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> Introduction:
>
> I propose making it possible for existing IPv6 address holders with
> the initial allocation address space to expand their address space
> without clearing the subsequent allocation requirement.
>
> This proposal has reached a consensus at JPNIC Open Policy Meeting.
>
> Summary of the current problem:
>
> In the past, many of the organizations had requested for the minimum
> allocation size(/32) as an initial allocation due to the following
> reasons:
>
> + Based on the idea of the "slow start" in IPv4 policy, many
> organizations believed it would be difficult to justify all of their
> address requirements at an initial allocation.
>
> + It was difficult to estimate their needs as IPv6 network was not
> commercially developed. Many organizations requested for address
> space for a test service in order to kick off the commercial
> service, not for the commercial service itself.
>
> + `PROVISIONAL IPv6 ASSIGNMENT AND ALLOCATION POLICY DOCUMENT'
> specified the initial allocation size as /35. LIRs which received
> allocations under this policy were only allowed an upgrade of
> their allocations to a /32.
>
> In recent days, most of the ISPs learned that /32 space is too small
> for the real scale service deployment if they cover their existing
> IPv4 users.
>
> Organizations currently requesting for initial allocations can simply
> request for a larger space as the RIRs actively emphasize to their
> communities that they are able to request for allocations greater than
> /32, which is already a common practice.
>
> However, ISPs with the default address space need to design the IPv6
> service network within the small space untill they clear the
> subsequent allocation requirement (HD-Ratio) for more address
> space. This makes the real IPv6 service deployment difficult,
> especially for large ISPs.
>
> Situation in other RIRs:
>
> none.
>
> Details of your proposal:
>
> Existing IPv6 initial allocation address holders should be able to
> expand their address space without satisfying subsequent allocation
> criteria if they are able to demonstrate their concrete plan. The same
> criteria should apply as organizations requesting for an initial
> allocation larger than /32.
>
> This proposal does not intend to change the current policy but to
> apply the current allocation practice to existing IPv6 address
> holders.
>
> If it is possible to expand the address space under the current
> policy, it is desirable to be documented clearly (e.g. in the
> guidelines document).
>
> Advantages and disadvantages of adopting the proposed policy:
>
> Advantages:
>
> Existing IPv6 address holders will be possible to start their services
> under up-to-date situation.
>
> Disadvantages:
>
> none
>
> Effect on APNIC members:
>
> The expanded address space would be considered in the assessment of
> the APNIC membership tier of the organization, on the renewal of their
> membership.
>
> Effect on NIRs:
>
> NIRs providing IPv6 address allocation service should apply the same
> policy.
>
> ____________________
>
> References
> ____________________
>
> Proposal details including full text of proposal, presentations, links
> to relevant meeting minutes, and links to mailing list discussions are
> available at:
>
> http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/proposals/prop-021-v001.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> APNIC Secretariat <secretariat@apnic.net>
> Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) Tel: +61-7-3858-3100
> PO Box 2131 Milton, QLD 4064 Australia Fax: +61-7-3858-3199
> Level 1, 33 Park Road, Milton, QLD http://www.apnic.net
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
Pierre Abelard
"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827
