Re: [sig-policy] IPv6 proposals summary and call for discussion {Securit
I have previously supported prop-090.
I didn't share your concerns relating to section 4.5 because it talks
about an "allocation", and believed that term only applies to LIRs /
ISPs.
I understood that a university, government department (like mine, for
example) or company wanting lots of multi-homed IPv6 would be getting an
"assignment", not an "allocation", from APNIC. Hence the provisions
you're concerned about would not apply.
I hope I'm still right
Regards
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net
[mailto:sig-policy-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] On Behalf Of Andy Linton
Sent: Wednesday, 9 February 2011 8:07 a.m.
To: sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] IPv6 proposals summary and call for discussion
[snip]
I'm less keen on the allocation criteria in Section 4.5. Sections 4.5.2
and 4.5.3 as written prevent any new organisation who isn't an ISP from
obtaining IPv6 address space for their own use.
So a new university, government department or company who may have many
hundreds or thousands of users can't multihome using IPv6 because they
don't plan to give out address space to other organisations?
We had criteria like these in place for IPv4 because we've recognised
for many years it was a scarce resource and people have fabricated
requests to the RIRs to justify their wants. Let's have delegation
criteria but not these ones.
[snip]
The information contained in this Internet Email message is intended
for the addressee only and may contain privileged information, but not
necessarily the official views or opinions of the New Zealand Defence Force.
If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or
distribute this message or the information in it.
If you have received this message in error, please Email or telephone
the sender immediately.