[sig-policy] Discussion on IPv6 policy development
I've been spending some time thinking about the policy development
process. We have a process that's been in place for many years and it
has served us pretty well. Our primary concern over the last few years
has been the management of the IPv4 address space and its imminent
exhaustion. To some degree we've been doing that using an issue by issue
approach.
I'm also conscious that we've had a long time to think about how we
manage IPv6 address space and it's really only now that we're really
turning our attention to that. If you look at the recent IPv6 policy
proposals a large number of them have been about how to justify and
manage requests for IPv6 address space which are larger than the minimum
allocation. For example:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-083
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-087
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-090
and we have more about to appear on the agenda for this meeting:
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-098
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-099
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-0100
In each case, those proposing the policy change are trying to deal with
similar but different aspects of the same problem. This isn't
about discouraging those who have specific issues from putting their
concerns and possible solutions forward as proposals but I'm conscious
that each time we put forward a proposal that deals with a specific case
we tend to make the policies more complex and perhaps harder to implement.
Would it be useful for us to look at this whole question of what a
reasonable IPv6 allocation looks like from a strategic point of view
rather than what appears to be the tactical approach we're using at present?
I've discussed this with Terence, my fellow co-chair and we're wondering
would it be useful for the Policy SIG to consider a working group that
gathered evidence and requirements from the whole APNIC community about
what's needed and report back to a future APNIC meeting with
recommendations that help us to avoid developing policy in a fragmented way?
There may be other ways to do this but would it be useful to have an
item on the Policy SIG agenda in Busan to discuss this? We'll deal with
the specific proposals that are being put forward of course but as this
will be our first meeting in the new era it would be good to spend some
time looking forward to IPv6 issues at a strategic level.
Regards,
andy