Dear Colleagues Thank you very much for taking interest in this proposal, Though we have tried to clarify the points raised during discussions and presentations and the theme behind this proposal however as a large number of members are not convinced. We will go thru various queries again and will clarify shortly. Regards R M Agarwal & B K Nath

-----Original Message----- From: sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net [mailto:sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of Andy Linton Sent: 06 September 2011 08:51 To: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net Subject: [sig-policy] prop-100 Returned to mailing list

Dear colleagues

prop-100 National IP Address Plan - Allocation of country-wide IP address blocks, did not reach consensus at the APNIC 32 Policy SIG. Therefore, this proposal is being returned to the author and the Policy SIG mailing list for further discussion.

Proposal details ----------------

This proposal calls for the reservation of adequate IPv6 address space for each economy in the Asia Pacific region. Future allocations of this space to be made to organizations and stakeholders in the usual way.

Proposal details including the full text of the proposal, history, and links to mailing list discussions are available at:

http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-100

Regards

Andy, Skeeve, and Masato

_______________________________________________________________________

prop-100-v001: National IP Address Plan - Allocation of country-wide IP address blocks _______________________________________________________________________

Author: Rakesh Mohan Agarwal ddgnt-dot@nic.in

Version: 2

Date: 30 August 2011

1. Introduction ---------------

A proposal was submitted to APNIC community on 29th July 2011 for the reservation of a contiguous IPv6 address block for different organizations / stakeholders in an economy. In that proposal I have tried to put forward some issues regarding the current practice of APNIC in the allocation of IPv6 addresses.

Further clarifications were given by me on 17/8, 22/8 and 28/8 against various comments and observations received during the period after that also. In the light of the above proposal and clarifications issued by me, I am submitting a revised version of Prop-100 for better understanding of the community members giving some background of why this proposal was submitted by India.

The Government of India released a national IPv6 policy in July 2010 in which it took the following important decisions –

1. All major service providers will target to handle IPv6 traffic and offer IPv6 services by December 2011

2. All central and state government ministries and departments, including its PSUs, shall start using IPv6 services by March-2012

3. Formation of India IPv6 Task Force

For the implementation of the above policy decisions many discussions were held with service providers and organizations in which they were of the opinion that there should be proper address planning for different organizations within the economy. So taking cue from this, Government of India (Department of Telecommunications) set up a committee for formulation of a National IPv6 address policy.

In the 2nd meeting of the committee held on 18th July 2011 in New Delhi, members were of the opinion that India as a whole should request for the reservation of a suitably-sized block of IPv6 addresses from APNIC. This block can be allocated to different organizations by keeping in view the long term planning perspective.

So it was decided that this issue should be taken up with APNIC. As this was a policy related issue, and other economies in the APNIC region may also have similar needs, therefore, the proposal was put up to APNIC for address block reservation at the economy level for subsequent allocation to different organizations within the economies in the APNIC region.

2. Summary ----------

Right now IPv6 addresses are being allocated to individual organizations in different economies by APNIC within a certain policy framework, which was developed in the IPv4 era. But there are certain concerns with the above APNIC policy -

(a) Contiguous address block allocation is not ensured by APNIC when an organization goes back to APNIC for further allocation (reapplying after more than one year)

(b) Non provision of address space for future organizations in economies who are not in a position (or not aware) to ask for addresses at present.

APNIC policy does not currently allow address blocks to be allocated at the economy level, so through this proposal, we are seeking a change in the policy for reservation of adequate IPv6 address space economy wise for further allocation to different organizations and stakeholders within the economy.

3. Situation in other RIRs --------------------------

No other RIRs presently have a program to assess the needs of individual economies in their region and reserve appropriately-sized address blocks. However, economies in other RIRs may have similar needs and a similar program of assessment may be appropriate.

4. Details ----------

In the current policy framework of APNIC, addresses are allocated to different organizations in different economies when they are able to demonstrate their need for those addresses and they apply for them. However, in this process two requirements, mentioned in summary above, are not taken into consideration. In the era of IPv4, when the addresses were in severe shortage, such a demonstrated need policy was relevant but in the era of IPv6 it is not.

IPv6 addresses are in abundance and their planning and distribution is also at a very nascent stage. The main objective of this proposal is to ensure that all economies (and the different present and future organizations in those economies) can ensure they will get a suitable share of the IPv6 address space, in one or more large contiguous blocks, whether they need it now or at a later date. This will also help different organizations in different economies to plan their networks in a more effective manner as they will have a reasonably fair idea of the IPv6 address space allocation in future.

This proposal can be implemented by APNIC in following manner.

(A) Analysis and Projection of Requirements

Each economy in the APNIC region is different in terms of population, population growth rate, GDP growth rate, mobile, internet and broadband penetration growth rate, social requirements etc. There could be many other factors, which could be taken into consideration. These factors would help to make an aggregate estimate of the present and future IPv6 address requirements of all organizations and stakeholders in each economy. The analysis of each economy in the APNIC region could be conducted in one of the following ways -

1. By APNIC, since it has more experience across different economies and different RIRs.

2. Alternatively, a representative body in each economy, which could be the government of that economy or a prominent industry association or any other recognised body, may be approached by APNIC for estimating the needs of that economy. However, in this case APNIC may need to\ conduct awareness programmes for their education and sufficient time is also required for making such estimation.

3. Any other suitable mechanism deemed fit by APNIC for doing such estimation.

Through these analysis and projection estimates, economy wise IPv6 address requirement (based on the requirements of different organizations and stakeholders) will emerge. This process will definitely take some time.

(B) Reservation of the IPv6 address space for different economies (for their organizations and stakeholders) by APNIC

Based on the above projections and estimates, APNIC may keep one or more suitably sized blocks reserved for different economies for ultimate use of organizations and stakeholders of those economies. APNIC may also keep some large blocks unreserved, i.e. not reserved for any economy in the beginning, for any sudden unforeseen requirements in future.

The allocation of addresses from these reserved blocks to organizations and stakeholders in different economies may be done directly by APNIC or through an NIR (wherever existing) as it is doing at present. Ultimately these addresses will be allocated to individual organizations / stakeholders and not to the economy. As an example, in case of India, after some discussions with service providers, internet associations and other stakeholders, an estimate of current and future requirements of a /16 block, initially, has been suggested. However, the firm requirement has to be deliberated based upon a detailed study as suggested above.

Detailed operational issues for implementing this policy, if approved, will have to be deliberated upon separately.

5. Pros/Cons ------------

Advantages:

1. The various IPv6 awareness programmes for different economies, the various studies for estimation of needs of different economies and management of the reserved IPv6 blocks as mentioned above will no doubt increase the job of APNIC in the immediate future, but over a long period of time, this would prove to be very beneficial for IPv6 deployment and also make the job of APNIC easier since APNIC would be very clear on what future allocations it can make.

2. The economies and their organizations will also benefit since they will have a fair idea of what they will get in future and they can plan accordingly for the long term for IPv6 deployment.

Disadvantages:

1. There may be short term workload/financial implications for APNIC for analysis and projection studies, training and awareness etc. These however, should not be a constraint because otherwise also APNIC has to work for IPv6 awareness and its deployment in all economies in APNIC region.

6. Effect on APNIC ------------------

1. It would prove to be very beneficial for IPv6 deployment and also make the job of APNIC easier since APNIC would be very clear on what future allocations it can make.

2. Address allocation will be more organized and orderly.

7. Effect on NIRs -----------------

NIRs can allocate IP addresses to individual members in its geographical area from the reserved blocks as per the actual projections of individual members. * 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

----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1392 / Virus Database: 1520/3879 - Release Date: 09/05/11