Re: [sig-policy] Revised version: prop-100 National IP Address Plan - Al
From my understanding of this proposal, the key points it makes are:
1. That countries cannot plan for IPv6 deployment because they will not to be able to get the IPv6 addresses they need in the future and so those addresses need to be reserved now, as explained in these paragraphs:
> 2. The economies and their organizations will also benefit since they
> will have a fair idea of what they will get in future and they can
> plan accordingly for the long term for IPv6 deployment.
> (b) Non provision of address space for future organizations in
> economies who are not in a position (or not aware) to ask for
> addresses at present.
> The main objective of this proposal is to
> ensure that all economies (and the different present and future
> organizations in those economies) can ensure they will get a suitable
> share of the IPv6 address space, in one or more large contiguous blocks,
> whether they need it now or at a later date.
2. That LIRs cannot get contiguous allocations of addresses, as explained in this paragraph:
> (a) Contiguous address block allocation is not ensured by APNIC when
> an organization goes back to APNIC for further allocation
> (reapplying after more than one year)
3. That the main benefits you identify for a reserved contiguous block for the whole country are the ability to plan and a tidy database, as explained in these paragraphs:
> 2. The economies and their organizations will also benefit since they
> will have a fair idea of what they will get in future and they can
> plan accordingly for the long term for IPv6 deployment.
> This will also help
> different organizations in different economies to plan their networks in
> a more effective manner as they will have a reasonably fair idea of the
> IPv6 address space allocation in future.
> 2. Address allocation will be more organized and orderly.
If that is correct, then would you be good enough to answer the following questions:
a. What evidence is there that any LIR (or aggregated across any country) will not be able to get the IPv6 addresses that it needs in the future?
b. What *routing* benefits will be derived from a contiguous address block for an entire country and what structure will be in place to ensure those benefits?
c. How can you guarantee that through this proposal the following problems are tackled:
- When an LIR goes back to the NIR, it can be guaranteed a contiguous allocation?
Perhaps the NIR will use a different allocation method to binary chop?
- That India will never need to go back to APNIC for another /16?
Or is the proposal that India gets a /16 and the one next to it is reserved for later use?
- That a country with a small population but the land mass for the population to grow hugely does not get too small a reserved contiguous block initially?
Or perhaps we should consider an allocation based on square centimeters rather than population just to be certain of this?
kind regards
Jay
--
Jay Daley
Chief Executive
.nz Registry Services (New Zealand Domain Name Registry Limited)
desk: +64 4 931 6977
mobile: +64 21 678840