j: Next unread message
k: Previous unread message
j a: Jump to all threads
j l: Jump to MailingList overview
Thanks for raising this.
The proposal webpage http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/proposals/ prop-034-v001.html provides links to policy proposal on IPv6 Portable assignment for multihoming in the other RIRs.
I've copied/paste ARINs Policy Proposal 2005-1: Provider-independent IPv6 Assignments for End Sites states: --snip-- 6.5.8. Direct assignments to end sites
126.96.36.199. To qualify for a direct assignment, an organization must:
a) not be an IPv6 LIR; and b) Qualify for an IPv4 assignment or allocation from ARIN under the IPv4 policy currently in effect.
188.8.131.52. Direct assignment size to end sites
Organizations that meet the direct end site assignment criteria are eligible to receive a direct assignment. The minimum size of the assignment is /48. Organizations requesting a larger assignment must provide documentation justifying the need for additional subnets.
These assignments shall be made from a distinctly identified prefix and shall be made with a reservation for growth of at least a /44.
184.108.40.206. Subsequent Assignment Size
Additional assignments may be made when the need for additional subnets is justified. When possible assignments will be made from an adjacent address block.
Jordi Palet submitted his proposal to the remaining RIRs after the ARIN XVII meeting.
Main difference I picked out against ARIN is the minimum assignment size of /32 in Jordi's proposal and also is submitted as an interim solution. He also proposes to have a reclamation period for previously assigned address space under this policy.
Jordi as proposer may want to clarify other bits.
The status where each RIR region is at is as follows: ARIN - awaiting Advisory Council last call review RIPE - in discussion phase AFRINIC and LACNIC - Discussed recently in their Open Policy meeting. Decision made to discuss further in their public mailing list.
APNIC - discussing in mailing list
regards, Save APNIC secretariat
On 29/05/2006, at 3:11 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
The following proposal "IPv6 portable assignment for end user organisations" ... Situation in other RIRs
All the RIRs are currently discussing a similar proposal.
can someone characterize the similar proposals in the other rirs? i.e. how are they similar and how do they differ from this one?
and could someone also summarize the current consensus on these proposals in the other rirs?
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management
policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list email@example.com http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy