Version 2 of the proposal "Automatic allocation/assignment of IPv6" has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 28 in Beijing, China, 25-28 August 2009. More about the proposal can be found at: http://www.apnic.net/community/policy/proposals This new version of the proposal reflects feedback from the community received on the Policy SIG mailing list: - While version 1 proposed automatic delegation of IPv6 addresses to APNIC members with IPv4 addresses, version 2 proposes reserving IPv6 addresses for members with IPv4, and providing members with a simplified way of requesting those resources be delegated to them. - To make it easier for a member to qualify for an IPv6 address delegation, this version specifies that new criteria be added to IPv6 allocation and assignment policies. - To reflect the above changes, sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 have significant changes, while section 7 has minor amendments. We encourage you to express your views on the proposal: - Do you support or oppose 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? Randy, Jian and Ching-Heng ________________________________________________________________________ prop-073-v002: Automatic allocation/assignment of IPv6 ________________________________________________________________________ Authors: Terry Manderson <terry at terrym dot net> Andy Linton <asjl at lpnz dot org> Version: 2 Date: 14 August 2009 1. Introduction ---------------- This is a proposal to simplify the criteria for a member requesting an initial block of IPv6 addresses where the member already has an IPv4 assignment or allocation. Under this proposal, APNIC would reserve the appropriately sized IPv6 block for each APNIC member that has IPv4 addresses but does not yet have IPv6 addresses. It is further proposed that members holding IPv4 addresses be able to request the IPv6 space reserved for them through a simple one-step process. 2. Summary of current problem ------------------------------ It is well understood that the final allocations of IPv4 address space are drawing very close. The community and APNIC Secretariat have done much to promote the adoption of IPv6. However, the authors recognize that the uptake of IPv6 is less than ideal. As a result, the community is looking for ways to promote the adoption of IPv6 so that it can be added to members' network infrastructure. The authors believe that the current APNIC processes recognize that an entity which has satisfied IPv4 criteria has done enough work to be assessed for IPv6 resources. This policy proposal aims to further promote IPv6 adoption by simplifying the process of applying to APNIC for IPv6 address space. 3. Situation in other RIRs --------------------------- RIPE: 2008-02,"Assigning IPv6 PA to Every LIR", a similar, but certainly not the same, proposal, was withdrawn by the author due to lack of support. There had been concern about the impact on member fees and that by issuing IPv6 addresses that hadn't been explicitly requested the proposal could make IPv6 a commodity. http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2008-02.html ARIN: We understand that there have been discussions on this topic in the ARIN region but we have not identified a formal proposal. There have been no similar proposals in other regions. 4. Details of the proposal --------------------------- It is proposed that: 4.1 Alternative criteria be added to the IPv6 allocation and assignment policies to allow APNIC members that have IPv4 but no IPv6 space to qualify for an appropriately size IPv6 block under the matching IPv6 policy. 4.2 The APNIC Secretariat reserve an appropriately sized IPv6 delegation for: - Any APNIC member that holds APNIC-managed IPv4 addresses, but does not yet have APNIC-managed IPv6 addresses - Any APNIC member in future that applies for and receives IPv4 addresses but has not yet received APNIC-managed IPv6 addresses 4.3 The size of the IPv6 reservation for the members described in section 4.2 above will be based on the following criteria: - A member that has an IPv4 allocation shall be reserved an IPv6 /32 - A member that has received an IPv4 assignment under the multihoming policy shall be reserved an IPv6 /48 - A member that has received an IPv4 assignment under the IXP or Critical Infrastructure policies shall be reserved an IPv6 /48 4.4 APNIC members can request the reserved IPv6 address block be allocated/assigned to their member account via a simple mechanism in existing APNIC on-line systems. To increase visibility of this proposal, the authors recommend that the APNIC Secretariat communicate to members and others that the criteria for receiving IPv6 space has been reduced and that the process of obtaining IPv6 address space has been made simpler. We recommend this to show that there is no effective barrier to members obtaining IPv6 addresses. Current IPv6 policies are still available for members who apply for IPv6 addresses without existing IPv4 addresses, or who apply for subsequent IPv6 resources. 5. Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal ------------------------------------------------ 5.1 Advantages This proposal: - Allows APNIC to engage with all IPv4 resource holders alerting them to the need to start work on deploying IPv6 addressing. - Pre-approves IPv6 resource delegations based on existing IPv4 holdings. - Increases member benefit by avoiding duplication and effort in applying to APNIC for IPv6 when they have already demonstrated their network needs for an IPv4 delegation. - Removes another barrier to IPv6 adoption by providing all eligible organisations with an IPv6 assignment or allocation through a simple request. 5.2 Disadvantages This proposal does not deal with the need to encourage holders of "Historic Internet resources" to apply for IPv6 address space. 6. Effect on APNIC members --------------------------- 6.1 Fees No member's fees will increase as a result of this proposal because under the APNIC fee schedule, assessed address fees are the greater of the IPv4 and IPv6 fees. This proposal was careful to ensure that IPv6 delegations would not increase a member's annual fees (based on the recently revised APNIC fee structure). 6.2 Responsibility A member would acquire the responsibility to manage and maintain a IPv6 allocation in the APNIC registry framework. 6.3 Address/Internet number resource consumption There are about 1300 current APNIC members that do not hold an IPv6 allocation. Allocating a /32 to each of these members would result in a maximum of /22 to /21 of IPv6 address space allocated if all 1300 members requested space. The actual allocation would be less than this as some members would receive a /48. 7. Effect on NIRs ------------------ The impact on any NIR would depend if the NIR adopts this proposal for their constituency.