|
Dear all,
After we reviewed the major concerns raised during the discussion in APNIC
28 about
prop-078 'Reserving /10 IPv4 address space to facilitate
IPv6 deployment'.
We have made some changes and come up with a revised proposal.
We are seeking your help for further feedback regarding our draft proposal,
so we can revise it further before we submit the new version.
We summarize the major concerns raised in APNIC 28 as follow:
- Doubt that a /24 is adequate for large LIR'
IPv6/IPv4 internetworking
- Subsequent allocations are not neccessary
- Prop-078 serves similiar purpose with the final /8 policy,
and seems dupicated
After carefull review of those comments, we admit that prop-078 has
similiar purpose with the
final /8, but we don't think it's duplicated. The major difference is
prop-078 specifically
require the applicant to demonstrate IPv6 deployment needs.
We understand most people gave feedback in APNIC 28 assumed that the final
/8
should be used for IPv6 transition. But the policy doesn't explicitly
require that.
After taken all the above into account, we come up with a draft
revision.
The main point of the new version is :
In order to make the message more clear, the proposal specifically
requires
IPv6 deployment needs or transition plan in final /8 allocations or
assignments.
It is proposed that in order to receive an allocation or assignment under the final /8 policy: 1. The applicant must demonstrate IPv6 transition plan or IPv6 deployment needs, especially the needs for IPv6 to IPv4 internetworking. 2. The applicant must either have existing IPv6 addresses or valid application for IPv6 addresses.
3. The applicant must meet the requirements specified in the current final /8 policy
The major changes to prop-078 version 1 is: -Extent the reserved /10 block to the whole /8 -The allocation size conform to the final /8 allocation size -Eliminate subsequent allocation
The major changes to the final /8 policy is: Requiring IPv6 deployment needs or transition plan in final /8 allocations or assignments The draft is attached at the bottom of this email,
we appreciate your comments and advices.
Thanks & Regards
Terence,Jane & Wendy
CNNIC
_______Prop-078 Version 2 Draft_______________________
Requiring IPv6 deployment needs or transition plan in final /8 allocations or assignments 1. Introduction
---------------- This policy proposal seeks to supplement the final /8 policy, by requiring
the applicant
to demonstrate immediate IPv6 deployment needs, which ensures LIRs use the
final /8
for IPv6 transition.
The intention is to stimulate native IPv6 deployment as much as possible,
while supporting
the need for future networks to communicate with the IPv4 world.
2. Summary of the current
problem
---------------------------------- The Internet will use IPv4 for many years during the adoption of
IPv6, during this period, LIRs will need to connect to the IPv4 Internet while they deploy services using the IPv6 Internet.
The final /8 policy has the objective to assist the LIR to participate in
the IPv4
Internet while they deploy services using the IPv6 Internet,but the final
/8 policy
does not specifically require LIRs to demonstrate IPv6 deployment needs or
transition plan.
A /22 allocation is still possible for some small LIRs to grow IPv4
services.
To make the message clear and ensure IPv4 space will remain available for
LIRs' IPv6 deployment. This policy proposal seeks to ensure the final /8
is used in IPv6 transition
3. Situation in other RIRs --------------------------- ARIN has adopted a similar policy:
2008-5: Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6
Deployment
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2008_5.html RIPE has similar policy proposal under discussion:
2009-04: IPv4 Allocation and Assignments to Facilitate
IPv6
Deployment http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2009-04.html AfriNIC and LACNIC currently have no similar policies or proposals.
4. Details ----------- It is proposed that in order to receive an allocation or assignment
under the final /8 policy:
1. The applicant must demonstrate IPv6 transition plan or
IPv6
deployment needs, especially the needs for IPv6 to IPv4 internetworking. 2. The applicant must either have existing IPv6 addresses or
valid application for IPv6 addresses.
3. The applicant must meet the requirements specified in the current
final /8 policy 5. Pros/Cons ------------- 5.1 Advantages:
- This proposal ensures LIR use the final /8 in IPv6 transition, which supporting the need for future networks to communicate with the IPv4
world.
5.2 Disadvantages: - Some LIRs cannot receive allocations or assignment from the final /8 just for growing IPv4 services.
6. Effect on APNIC members --------------------------- This proposal requires APNIC LIRs (existing and new) to demonstrate IPv6
deployment
needs or transition plan to receive IPv4 allocation or assignment from the
final /8.
7. Effect on NIRs ------------------ Same as effect on APNIC members
8. References ------------- [1] See section 9.10, "Policies for IPv4 address
space
management in the Asia Pacific region" http://www.apnic.net/policy/add-manage-policy.html#9.10
|