Dear SIG members

The proposal "Proposal to change IPv6 initial allocation criteria" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 23 in Bali, Indonesia, 26 February - 2 March 2007. You are invited to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list before the meeting.

The proposal's history can be found at:

http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-042-v001.html

Regards,

Toshiyuki Hosaka on behalf of Policy SIG chair hosaka@nic.ad.jp

________________________________________________________________________

prop-042-v001: Proposal to change IPv6 initial allocation criteria

________________________________________________________________________

Author: Jordi Palet Martinez, Consulintel

Version: 1

Date: 22 January 2007

SIG: Policy

Introduction ------------ This policy modification is intended to provide a solution for the lengthy discussions that have taken place in the different regions regarding existing IPv6 policies. It also takes account of the changes that have already taken place in other Regional Internet Registry (RIR) service regions.

Summary of the current problem ------------------------------ It is clear that there are small Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that do not currently have 200 customers, consequently is not feasible for them to make "at least 200 /48" assignments in two years. It is, however, unfair that these ISPs have no access to IPv6 address space.

Situation in other RIRs ----------------------- This proposal has also been submitted to ARIN, AfriNIC, LACNIC and RIPE NCC regions.

Some of the RIRs don't have already the 200 /48 restriction and have some text that freely allows the hostmaster to consider any submission ("reasonable number").

Details ------- The following policy changes are proposed for APNIC-089, "IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy":

1. Initial allocation criteria

The following changes are proposed in section 5.1.1 of APNIC-089:

a) Remove the need to have a plan to make 200 /48 assignments in two years and replace it with a plan to make a reasonable number of assignments in two years.

Pros/Cons ---------

Advantages:

There have been already clear examples and discussions in different regions about the need for this modification.

By setting up this policy, we would avoid creating an unfair situation among different RIR service regions. Other RIRs have already modified the original IPv6 common policy to avoid these barriers.

We could possibly say that an arbitrary number of sites in order to qualify for an allocation could be considered illegal in some countries. The APNIC community cannot set policies that could prove unlawful as this could have important implications.

Disadvantages:

One possible effect of this proposal would be a growth of global routing tables. This is only to be expected when new allocations are made possible under this proposal.

Opposing arguments should avoid being unfair to smaller ISPs that could not justify a fixed number of assignments. Such a policy could be seen as irrational and might be comparable with imposing a similar requirement for IPv4 address space allocations, which the community would be unlikely to accept.

Effect on APNIC --------------- There may be a small increase in the number of IPv6 allocation requests from LIRs that do not have a plan for 200 customers.

Effect on NIRs -------------- NIRs may need to adapt their own similar policy. Otherwise, small ISPs may become APNIC LIRs to access an IPv6 prefix.

(end of document)