Re: [Wg-ipv6-guide] (ToC11) Database Registration

[Izumi Okutani <izumi@nic.ad.jp>]

Hi all,

>  | > <Allocations to downstream ISPs>
>  | >  It is ambiguous in the policy document, and these are the
>  | >  possibilities in implementation:
>  | > 
>  | >  a) All allocations to downstream ISPs must be registered in RIR/NIR
>  | >     database 
>  | >  b) Allocations to downstream ISPs should not be registered in RIR/NIR
>  | >     database
>  | >  c) It is upto LIRs to register allocations for downtream ISPs in the
>  | >     RIR/NIR database
> // snip
>  | May I suggest to discuss this issue together with the authority to
>  | register assignments for sub-allocated blocks?  I think they are
>  | closely related issues and difficult to discuss one without the other.
>  | 
>  | > > a) Only LIRs can register assignments for downstream ISP customers
>  | > > b) Only downstream ISP can register assignments for its customers
>  | > > c) Case by case. Depends on how you set the maintainer
> 
> I prefer c) - c) (allocation - authority).  It should be up to LIRs.
I agree with c) for the authority. Regarding the registration of
sub-allocations, I think either a) or c) is okay.
 
I have a question to APNIC too.

In the current IPv4 model, I believe it's a)-c). Is it technically
possible to set the registration authority for sub-allocated
blocks(option c) without registering sub-allocations(option c)?

If yes, I think c)-c) is fine. 

> And regardless of choices, it should be written in guidelines document
> with the pros and cons discussion.
Fujisaki-san, do you mean that we should clarify prerequisites and
responsibilities of the LIRs attached to the choice? If yes, I agree.


Izumi