[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Dear Colleagues, I am Satoru Tsurumaki from Japan Open Policy Forum Steering Team.. I would like to share key feedback in our community for prop-158,based on a meeting we organised on 31th Jan to discuss these proposals. This feedback is sent on my behalf, but please note that it is a summary of

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

This proposal is yet another gift from the bad idea fairy… Wait… It’s actually a regift from someone else who got it from the bad idea fairy on its last go-around. While I’m all for reuse and recycling, this one needs to go to the landfill. It was a bad idea the first several times it was

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Dear SIG members, The Secretariat's impact assessment for this proposal is provided below as well as published at: http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-158 APNIC notes that this proposal suggests automatically delegating IPv6 address resource to new and initial IPv4 requests to

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Echoing what David has said + there exists a NIR - -SIG in the APNIC ecosystem. Its charter is to share information on operations, policies, and procedures and close cooperation with APNIC. Regards Anupam Agrawal On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 2:21 PM David Conrad wrote: > Fernando, > > On Jan 24,

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Hi, On Jan 15, 2024, at 12:39 AM, Bertrand Cherrier via SIG-policy wrote: > > Dear SIG members, > > A new proposal "prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request" > has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. > > It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting (OPM) at APNIC 57

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Fernando, On Jan 24, 2024, at 3:47 PM, Fernando Frediani wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jan 2024, 07:39 David Conrad, > wrote: >> On Jan 24, 2024, at 4:19 AM, Fernando Frediani > > wrote: >> > No government should ever be able to mandate anything

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

I do not believe this policy will achieve its stated objective: to accelerate IPv6 implementation. Automatically delegating IPv6 address space to new and initial IPv4 requests, may increase the number of IPv6 delegations. But, the bar to get an IPv6 delegation is already pretty low, and it is not

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 9:49 PM Fernando Frediani wrote: > > On Wed, 24 Jan 2024, 21:50 Christopher Hawker, > wrote: > >> NIRs may well continue to exist and perform their administrative >> functions under the umbrella of the RIR facilitating things in certain >> economies and cultures. >> >>

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

. Regards, Mike *From:* Fernando Frediani *Sent:* Wednesday, January 24, 2024 10:25 AM *To:* sig-policy *Subject:* [sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request To resume my initial point there is no point in allowing NIRs to develop and hav

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Hello Fernando, To resume my initial point there is no point in allowing NIRs to develop and have specific policies, complicate and confuse things unecessarily. It only complicates and confuses things for people who have no idea or understanding what goes on and what they are talking about.

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

. Regards, Mike From: Fernando Frediani Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2024 10:25 AM To: sig-policy Subject: [sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request To resume my initial point there is no point in allowing NIRs to develop and have

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

To resume my initial point there is no point in allowing NIRs to develop and have specific policies, complicate and confuse things unecessarily. Policies developed by the entire RIR community is more than enough in order to regulate how IP addreess assignment is conducted as in all.other RIRs

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Hi On Wed, 24 Jan 2024, 07:39 David Conrad, wrote: > Fernando, > > On Jan 24, 2024, at 4:19 AM, Fernando Frediani > wrote: > > No government should ever be able to mandate anything related to policy > development and how they apply to IP space assignment and use. > > I’m actually curious: why

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Fernando, On Jan 24, 2024, at 4:19 AM, Fernando Frediani wrote: > No government should ever be able to mandate anything related to policy > development and how they apply to IP space assignment and use. I’m actually curious: why do you believe you (or the RIRs) are able to tell governments

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Hello On 23/01/2024 20:49, Christopher Hawker wrote: They play a important administrative role in certain places and economies, but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to develop policies. I disagree. As David has identified, NIRs may in some cases may have legal mandates

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Chiristopher, Fernando et al, I am an employee of the entity which runs an NIR.  Let me clarify on some points which have appeared in this thread. 1) an NIR needs to enter into  "APNIC and NIR Member Relationship Agreement" and needs to comply with it. Its article 3.2-e stipulates "Enter

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

They play a important administrative role in certain places and economies, but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to develop policies. I disagree. As David has identified, NIRs may in some cases may have legal mandates set by the governments of their economies relating to the management of

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Hello David On 23/01/2024 12:08, David Conrad wrote: You appear to have an interesting perception of the function/prerogative of NIRs. You are aware that some NIRs pre-date the RIRs and generally, NIRs reflect the preferences (or, in some cases, legal mandates) related to the management

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Fernando, On Jan 23, 2024, at 12:15 AM, Fernando Frediani wrote: > On 15/01/2024 21:34, Christopher Hawker wrote: >> >> > One thing that must end in APNIC is the possibility for NIR to have their >> > own set of policies. >> >> An NIR at the APNIC level, is treated as any other APNIC member

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

> One thing that must end in APNIC is the possibility for NIR to have their own set of policies. An NIR at the APNIC level, is treated as any other APNIC member with the exception of the fees they charge. They effectively perform the same functions as an RIR, with the exception that they perform

[sig-policy] Re: New proposal: prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request

Hi David and Andri, If I understand the proposal correctly, the idea is to provide IPv6 space to applicants when receiving IPv4, and require them to dual-stack when deploying a network, yes? A few things I'd like to get clarification on: If a new member were to apply for a /24 or /23 IPv4 prefix