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-137, based on a meeting we organised on 25th Aug to discuss these proposals. As an NIR, JPNIC does not have a tier of associate members, making it difficult to supporce or opporse from Japanese community members. (comment details) - It may be necessary to sort out the consistency of this proposal when it becomes a consensus, including other NIRs that similarly do not have an associate member tier. - The points of concern in the case of JPNIC are as follows: - Implementation is difficult because there is no tier of associate members. - There may be no need to force the implementation. Regards, Satoru Tsurumaki / JPOPF Steering Team 2021年8月13日(金) 8:56 Bertrand Cherrier <[email protected]>: > Dear SIG members, > > The proposal "prop-137-v001: IPv6 assignment for associate members" > has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. > > It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting (OPM) at APNIC 52 > on Thursday, 16 September 2021. > > https://conference.apnic.net/52/program/schedule/#/day/4 > > We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing > list before the OPM. > > The comment period on the mailing list before the OPM is an important > part of the Policy Development Process (PDP). We encourage you to > express your views on the proposal: > > - Do you support or oppose this proposal? > - Does this proposal solve a problem you are experiencing? If so, > tell the community about your situation. > - Do you see any disadvantages in this proposal? > - Is there anything in the proposal that is not clear? > - What changes could be made to this proposal to make it more effective? > > Information about this proposal is appended below and also available at: > > http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-137 > > Regards, > Bertrand and Ching-Heng > APNIC Policy SIG Chairs > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > prop-137-v001: IPv6 assignment for associate members > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > Proposer: Aftab Siddiqui ([email protected]) > > > 1. Problem statement > -------------------- > The first tier of membership in APNIC is "Associate". As per APNIC-121 > Section 2.1 and 2.2, the Associate members do not receive any address > space (IPv4 or IPv6). In order to be eligible for IPv6 assignment APNIC > Members that have been delegated an IPv4 address block from APNIC, but > have no IPv6 space, instantly qualify for an appropriately sized IPv6 > block without any restriction. If you have no IPv4 delegation and only > requesting IPv6 assignment then as per APNIC-127 section 10.1.4 > "Requests for Provider Independent assignments must include a detailed > plan of intended usage of the proposed address block over at least the > 12 months following the allocation". The minimum size of the assignment > is a /48 and requires annual fees of AUD 1,180 as per HD ratio. > > In the IPv4 exhaustion world, this policy limits anyone who wants to > only use IPv6 provider independent assignment for personal use as it > doesn't incentivise IPv6 assignment only. The same fees and > justification is applied to receive /24 IPv4 + /48 IPv6 address space. > > This is perceived as a clear barrier to deploy IPv6. This policy > proposal addresses that barrier aims to solve this problem by means of > providing a Provider Independent assignment to Associate members. > > > 2. Objective of policy change > ----------------------------- > Provide an incentive to small enterprises and academia/researchers to > receive IPv6 assignment. > > > 3. Situation in other regions > ----------------------------- > RIPE NCC: IPv6 PI can be sponsored by an LIR (EUR 50/yr) > ARIN: As an end-user IPv6 only can be requested following certain criteria > AFRINIC: Must not be an LIR > LACNIC: Not been an LIR or ISP, submit addressing plans for at least a year > > > https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/RIR-Comparative-Policy-Overview-2021-Q2.pdf > > > Section 3.4.3 - END USERS > > > 4. Proposed policy solution > --------------------------- > Remove APNIC-114 "APNIC guidelines for IPv6 allocation and assignment > requests" requirement for initial IPv6 provider independent assignment > as per APNIC-127 Section 10.1.4. > > Use the same "Go IPv6" criteria and enable "Get IPv6 Addresses Now" > options for Associate members with the restrictions that the Provider > Independent assignment cannot be further assigned to other organisations. > > The Associate member MUST agree to use and announce the IPv6 provider > independent address space within twelve (12) months. After that period, > if not announced or APNIC host masters believe that it is not in use > then the assigned IPv6 address space should be reclaimed and returned to > the free pool. > > Note: This is outside the scope of the policy proposal, therefore > requesting APNIC EC to consider that only Associate membership fees > should be applied to initial IPv6 provider independent assignment of /48 > only. > > > 5. Advantages / Disadvantages > ----------------------------- > Advantages: > This will give incentive to those small enterprises and academics > willing to use their own IPv6 addresses but not in a position to be a > very small tier member. > > Disadvantages: > - This might slightly increase over head for host masters. > - The possible effect of this proposal is the growth of the global > routing table > > > 6. Impact on resource holders > ----------------------------- > No impact on existing resource holders. > > > 7. References > ------------- > None. > * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy > * > _______________________________________________ > sig-policy mailing list > [email protected] > https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy -- -- Satoru Tsurumaki BBIX, Inc
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
