Re: [sig-policy] prop-073:Automatic allocation/assignment of IPv6
Terry Manderson said the following on 12/8/09 16:03 :
>
> My desire is to make the process as simple as possible for anyone who
> has IPv4 to get IPv6, using their existing v4 allocation as enough
> justification to be allocated an appropriate sized IPv6 prefix in the
> constructs of their existing membership and fee tier.
This I would be entirely happy with. And it is all a policy proposal
needs to say. Short, sweet, simple.
But it doesn't seem to be expressed this way in prop-073. :-(
> By simple, I think a single "click here to receive allocation" in
> MyAPNIC is perfectly achievable.
I guess so - if account holders can apply for Internet resources already
via MyAPNIC, this should be trivial to include.
> So, if we were to revise the proposal and issue a new version, would
> you be (more) comfortable with the premise:
> * APNIC reserves, but not allocate, a v6 prefix for each member who
> holds v4 commensurate with the metrics in prop-073. [2]
What benefit will making a reservation have over being allocated when
the account holder asks for it? Is there a fear that we'll run out of
IPv6 address space?
> * The prefix is only allocated to a member account when a member
> requests it via an online "button".
Do we have to specify the process? Surely the Secretariat are able to
work out how to do this?
> * The secretariat communicates with CEOs/CTOs/the region as to the
> new ease of v6 allocation.
I'd hope they are already communicating with everyone everywhere.
Certainly any event I go to which has APNIC staff participating there is
a considerable amount of IPv6 information being made available (to the
extent that some people groan or sigh and return to their laptops rather
than paying attention).
Maybe there are other avenues that could be explored that have been so
far missed by the various IPv6 Forums, Promotion Councils, Task Forces,
Future Internet, Marketing and other organisations aren't getting to?
But perhaps not a discussion for the Policy SIG, as you observed. ;-)
philip
--