Re: [sig-policy] New proposal prop-122-v001: Updating "Subsequent IPv6 a

    • To: "SIG policy" <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
    • Subject: Re: [sig-policy] New proposal prop-122-v001: Updating "Subsequent IPv6 allocation " policy
    • From: "Bertrand Cherrier" <b.cherrier at micrologic dot nc>
    • Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 17:59:24 +1100
    • Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
    • In-reply-to: <CAHXx+kTUimGT0F1r1t3iQ_TAL7VPZQGtjGnEOavhkqaLhV5RgA@mail.gmail.com>
    • List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/>
    • List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
    • List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
    • List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
    • List-subscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
    • List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/options/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
      • Dear all,

        Thank you very much Satoru-san (and the Policy Group of Japan) for your detailed comments on all the props.

        Regards,


        Bertrand Cherrier
        Administration Systèmes - R&D
        Micro Logic Systems
        b.cherrier at micrologic dot nc
        https://www.mls.nc
        Tél : +687 24 99 24
        VoIP : 65 24 99 24
        Service Clientèle : +687 36 67 76 (58F/min)


        On 8 Sep 2017, at 17:33, Satoru Tsurumaki wrote:

        Dear Colleagues,


        I am Satoru Tsurumaki from Policy Working Group in Japan.

        I would like to share key feedback in our community for prop-122,
        based on a meeting we organised on 5th Sep to discuss these proposals.


        Many opposing comments were expressed with the same reasons as for prop-121.

        * Under the current criteria, networks with IPv4 can receive IPv6
        easily. However, with adoption of this proposal, this consideration
        based on IPv4 network will be removed, and the policy could become
        more strict for some applications.

        * Would like to confirm how specifically APNIC secretariat will
        evaluate requests under this policy. The criteria becomes ambiguous
        with this proposal which would make it harder for applications to
        prepare for the evaluation.

        * Approach may not be the right one to achieve the objective of IPv6 promotion

        * From the current IPv6 allocation criteria, it is unlikely to have
        many cases where criteria. d is being the barrier to receive IPv6
        space.


        Best Regards,

        Satoru Tsurumaki
        Policy Working Group
        Japan Open Policy Forum

        2017-08-09 15:20 GMT+09:00 chku <chku at twnic dot net dot tw>:

        Dear SIG members

        The proposal "prop-122-v001: Updating "Subsequent IPv6 allocation"
        policy. " has been sent to the Policy SIG for review.

        It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting at APNIC 44 which will
        be held in Taichung, Taiwan on Wednesday and Thursday, 14 & 15 September
        2017.

        We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
        before the meeting.

        The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
        important part of the policy development process. We encourage you to
        express your views on the proposal:

        - Do you support or oppose this proposal?
        - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so,
        tell the community about your situation.
        - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal?
        - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear?
        - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more
        effective?

        Information about this proposal is available at:

        http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-122

        Regards

        Sumon, Ching-Heng, Bertrand
        APNIC Policy SIG Chairs


        ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        prop-122-v001: Updating “Subsequent IPv6 allocation” policy

        ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Proposer: Jordi Palet Martinez
        jordi.palet at consulintel dot es

        Problem Statement
        -----------------
        If we reach consensus on the Updating "Initial IPv6 allocation"
        policy, it is necessary to align the text of the subsequent allocations,
        in order to be coherent and not discriminate LIRs with existing
        allocations.

        If consensus on that policy proposal is not reached, this proposal also
        allows LIRs with existing allocations a better justification of their
        new needs and not limited to a 2 years period.

        The actual policy text (9.3.4. Size of subsequent allocation) is
        assuming that an LIR will need just doubling his actual block, and then
        states the possibility of more space providing the relevant
        documentation. However, it is limiting that to a two-years period.


        Objective of policy change
        --------------------------
        To make sure that the subsequent IPv6 allocation policy is synchronized
        with the initial allocation one.


        Situation in other regions
        --------------------------
        Both RIPE and LACNIC have approved equivalent changes.


        Proposed policy solution
        ------------------------
        Change some of the actual text as follows.


        Actual text:

        9.3.4. Size of subsequent allocation

        When an organization has achieved an acceptable utilization for its
        allocated address space, it is immediately eligible to obtain an
        additional allocation that results in a doubling of the address space
        allocated to it. Where possible, except where separate disaggregated
        ranges are requested for multiple discrete networks, the allocation will
        be made from an adjacent address block, meaning that its existing
        allocation is extended by one bit to the left.

        If an organization needs more address space, it must provide
        documentation justifying its requirements for a two-year period. The
        allocation made will be based on this requirement.


        New text:

        9.3.4. Size of subsequent allocation

        When an organization has achieved an acceptable utilization for its
        allocated address space, it is immediately eligible to obtain an
        additional allocation that results in a doubling of the address space
        allocated to it.

        Where possible, except where separate disaggregated ranges are requested
        for multiple discrete networks, the allocation will be made from an
        adjacent address block, meaning that its existing allocation is extended
        by one bit to the left.

        If an organization needs more address space, it must provide
        documentation justifying its new requirements. The allocation size, will
        be based on the new needs (the number of users, the extent of the
        organisation's infrastructure, the hierarchical and geographical
        structuring of the organisation, the segmentation of infrastructure for
        security and the planned longevity of the allocation).


        Advantages of the proposal
        --------------------------
        Fulfilling the objective above indicated.


        Disadvantages of the proposal
        -----------------------------
        Possible abuse of the policy, which may be done equally creating new
        LIRs, and it is expected that the evaluation process of a request from
        APNIC will avoid it.


        Impact on resource holders
        --------------------------
        None.


        References
        ----------
        Links to the RIPE and LACNIC texts on request.







        _______________________________________________
        Sig-policy-chair mailing list
        Sig-policy-chair at apnic dot net
        https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy-chair

        * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
        _______________________________________________
        sig-policy mailing list
        sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
        https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

        * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
        _______________________________________________
        sig-policy mailing list
        sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
        https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy