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 proposed and nothing has 
changed to make it a good idea now.

Owen


> On Jan 29, 2024, at 16:24, Sunny Chendi <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 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 accelerate IPv6 implementation.
> 
> APNIC also notes that this proposal is applicable to both APNIC and NIR 
> account holders.
> 
> Questions/Comments:
> - The current APNIC Membership form allows account holders to request 
> multiple IP resources (IPv4, IPv6, and ASN) while applying for APNIC 
> membership. Account holders can also simply get an IPv6 delegation by 
> one-click process in MyAPNIC.
> 
> - The proposal suggests “Automatically delegated IPv6 address should be put 
> into deployment within two years from the date of the delegation”. Is the 
> intention that the outcome of not complying with this policy is the 
> revocation of just the IPv6 resources, also the IPv4 resources applied for at 
> the same time, or an alternative option?
> 
> - If the account holder requests a /23 IPv4 and is also automatically 
> delegated a /32 IPv6, the fees payable by the account holder will increase as 
> the fee for /32 IPv6 is greater than /23 IPv4.
> 
> Implementation:
> If this proposal reaches consensus, implementation may be completed within 
> three months.
> 
> Regards,
> Sunny
> APNIC Secretariat
> 
> 
> On 15/01/2024 9:39 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 on
>> Thursday, 29 February 2024.
>> 
>> https://2024.apricot.net/program/program/#/day/9/
>> 
>> 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 as well as available at:
>> 
>> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-158
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Bertrand, Shaila, and Anupam
>> APNIC Policy SIG Chairs
>> 
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> prop-158-v001: IPv6 auto-allocation for each IPv4 request
>> 
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Proposers: David Aditya Yoga Pratama ([email protected])
>>                  M. Andri Setiawan ([email protected])
>> 
>> 
>> 1. Problem statement
>> -------------------------
>> 
>> Based on this 
>> https://www.apnic.net/manage-ip/ipv4-exhaustion/#how-much-apnic-has, APNIC 
>> still has around 2,539,776 available IPv4 addresses and may claimed another 
>> 2,479,360 reserved IPv4 addresses.
>> 
>> APNIC member still can get /24 of IPv4 addresses based on the current APNIC 
>> policy.
>> 
>> Most of the new IPv4 requestors are not allocated or requesting IPv6 even 
>> though they are eligible to do so.
>> 
>> The rates of IPv4 allocation is faster than IPv6 allocation and it may keep 
>> slow the deployment of IPv6.
>> 
>> APNIC associate member can get IPv6 without additional cost (proposal-155), 
>> so APNIC member should be able to do the same when they request IPv4 address.
>> 
>> 2. Objective of policy change
>> ----------------------------------
>> 
>> Allocate IPv6 addresses to each IPv4 addresses requests to speed up the IPv6 
>> adoption and deployment rates.
>> 
>> 3. Situation in other regions
>> --------------------------------
>> 
>> AFRINIC - No such policy
>> ARIN - No such policy and it has no available address space to be offered
>> RIPE NCC - No such policy and it has no available address space to be offered
>> LACNIC - IPv6 allocation request is used as “requirements” for any IPv4 
>> request as mentioned in their policy point 2.3.3.1 - 2.3.3.4 and 2.3.4. “The 
>> applicant must already have at least one IPv6 block assigned by LACNIC or, 
>> if not, must simultaneously request an initial IPv6 block in accordance with 
>> the corresponding applicable policy. (If an applicant has already been 
>> assigned an IPv6 block, they shall submit to LACNIC a brief document 
>> describing their progress in the implementation of IPv6.)”
>> 
>> 4. Proposed policy solution
>> --------------------------------
>> Add this to Section "6.1. Minimum and maximum IPv4 delegations" of the APNIC 
>> Policy document.
>> 
>> For all new and initial IPv4 delegation requests, APNIC and NIR will 
>> automatically delegates IPv6 address, matching the IPv6 policy in Section 
>> 8.2.1 (i.e allocation or assignment).
>> 
>> Automatically delegated IPv6 address should be put into deployment within 
>> two years from the date of the delegation, same as Point 3 in Section 8.2.2.
>> 
>> For any subsequent IPv4 requests, APNIC and NIR account holder should be 
>> able to demonstrate the deployment status of the automatically delegated 
>> IPv6 address space. APNIC and NIR may verify these details with the publicly 
>> available routing/BGP data and any other sourceses.
>> 
>> 5. Advantages / Disadvantages
>> ------------------------------------
>> Advantages:
>> -Maintain the consistency mapping between IPv4 and IPv6 allocation.
>> -Speed up the adoption of IPv6 addresses.
>> 
>> Disadvantages:
>> -The allocated IPv6 may not be deployed by the LIRs on time.
>> -Change on the resources allocation system at APNIC.
>> 
>> 6. Impact on resource holders
>> -----------------------------------
>> No Impact on resource holders.
>> 
>> Impact on APNIC:
>> - Change the allocation system at APNIC to automatically allocate IPv6 
>> without any options to select IPv4 address, IPv6 address or both.
>> - It may change the pricing scheme without considering IPv6 address 
>> allocation when member request both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses.
>> 
>> 7. References
>> ----------------
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
> 
> -- 
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 
> Srinivas (Sunny) Chendi (he/him)
> Senior Advisor - Policy and Community Development
> 
> Asia Pacific Network Information Centre (APNIC) |  Tel: +61 7 3858 3100
> PO Box 3646 South Brisbane, QLD 4101 Australia  |  Fax: +61 7 3858 3199
> 6 Cordelia Street, South Brisbane, QLD          |  http://www.apnic.net
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 
> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
> and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
> review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all
> copies of the original message.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

_______________________________________________
SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to