I agree that IOT does not need a separate IPv6 allocation policy. If you want to clarify that IOT is included under the current IPv6 allocation policies, that might be appropriate, but I don't think even that is really necessary.
A group to encourage and facilitate IPv6 adoption in IOT would be a great idea, but policy isn't necessary for that. Thanks On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 12:25 PM Fernando Frediani <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > I don't get why Internet of Things needs to have an special allocation in > the policy. Any allocation made to an organization being it an ISP or an > End-User can be used to connect IoT devices without any issues. If the > requester usage is to connect IoT devices that is a normal and valid > justification among several others. > > I don't get either the part of the text that says "allocating IPv6 > addresses to non-electronic items". As far as I understand numbering > resources can only be allocated to organizations and they will assign for > usage for their or their customer devices as needed. > > The IPv6 address used by any IoT device will always depend on the company > that owns the device and where it is connected. If the company has an > previous allocation it can use freely on their own devices, but if the > device changes connectivity or ownership it may not be able to keep that > IPv6 address. > > Also I can't see the link between a /32 and the amount of IP addresses > that can be potentially used by IoT devices. Normally hundreds or thousands > of these devices can exists within the very same /64, and even in a more > exotic scenario a /64 per device most allocations can supply it without any > concerning or shortages. > > Therefore I oppose this proposal as I don't see anything that can't be > done with the current policies. > > Regards > Fernando > On 05/08/2024 06:09, Bertrand Cherrier via SIG-policy wrote: > > Dear SIG members, > > A new proposal "prop-161-v001: Using IPv6 for Internet of Things (IoT)" > has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. > > It will be presented at the Open Policy Meeting (OPM) at APNIC 58 on > Friday, 6 September 2024. > > https://conference.apnic.net/58/program/program/index.html#/day/8/ > > 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-161 > > Regards, > Bertrand, Shaila, and Anupam > APNIC Policy SIG Chairs > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > prop-161-v001: Using IPv6 for Internet of Things (IoT) > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Proposers: > Guangliang Pan (Benny) [email protected] > Wei Wong (Wesley) [email protected] > Qiang Li [email protected] > Yaling Tan [email protected] > > 1. Problem statement > ----------------------- > Internet of Things (loT) is part of the future Internet. However, there > is no clear IPv6 policy for IoT in APNIC’s current policy environment. > In some of the cases, the IoT industry needs to assign IPv6 to > electronic smart devices as well as non-electronic items. The > non-electronic items include company products and assets. IPv6 addresses > will be used as universally compatible identifiers for these > non-electronic items for the purpose of identification, verification, > and tracing. It is a bit difficult for APNIC Hostmasters to evaluate > such IPv6 requests without a clear policy to allow allocating IPv6 > addresses to non-electronic items. This policy proposal aims to address > this issue and meet the needs from the IoT industry. > > > 2. Objective of policy change > ------------------------------- > Add clear clauses about how IPv6 can be allocated to Internet of Things > in IPv6 policy. > > > 3. Situation in other regions > ------------------------------ > There are some discussions about “Need IPv6 in IoT” in other regions. > RIPE NCC has an “Internet of Things Working Group”. > > > 4. Proposed policy solution > ------------------------------ > 1. Add a new clause in IPv6 policy. > 8.2.3 Using IPv6 for Internet of Things (IoT) > IPv6 addresses can be allocated to IoT Objects which include electrical > devices and non-electrical items. A default initial IPv6 allocation size > for IoT is a /32. > > 2. Add the following sentence at the end of 8.3.4. Size of subsequent > allocation > An IoT Object will be counted as a normal single host while evaluating > subsequent allocation size for IoT services according to the IPv6 policy. > > 5. Advantages / Disadvantages > --------------------------------- > Advantages: > IPv6 has huge number of IP addresses and IoT needs huge number of IP > addresses. It is a perfect match connects APNIC community with the IoT > industry. Encourage using IPv6 for IoT will help IPv6 deployment in > future Internet. > > Disadvantages: > None > Not to worry about run out of IPv6. The original design of IPv6 was for > Internet of Things. You often hear IPv6 can be assigned to every single > sand in the world :) We can trust APNIC Hostmasters will do the > evaluation properly. > > 6. Impact on resource holders > -------------------------------- > No impacts to the current resource holders in the APNIC region. > > > 7. References > -------------- > > > _______________________________________________ > 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] -- =============================================== David Farmer Email:[email protected] Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information Technology University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815 Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952 ===============================================
_______________________________________________ SIG-policy - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
