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-160,based on a meeting we organised on 28th Aug to discuss these proposals. This feedback is sent on my behalf, but please note that it is a summary of the discussions among the 18 Japanese community members (5 on-site, 13 remote) who attended the meeting. Many oppose opinions were expressed about this proposal. (comment details) - As noted in Secretariat's impact assessment, there is a mix of assignments and allocations and it is difficult to understand the changes intended by the author. - There seems to be no need to decrease the IPv6 address delegation size. Regards, Satoru Tsurumaki JPOPF Steering Team 2024年8月5日(月) 18:03 Bertrand Cherrier via SIG-policy <[email protected]>: > > Dear SIG members, > > A new proposal "prop-160-v001: Change IPv6 Initial assignment to /44 for > Organizations Eligible for /23 IPv4" > 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-160 > > Regards, > Bertrand, Shaila, and Anupam > APNIC Policy SIG Chairs > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > prop-160-v001: Change IPv6 Initial assignment to /44 for Organizations > Eligible for /23 IPv4 > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Proposer: Md. Rafeeun Noby Babir ([email protected]) > > > 1. Problem Statement > ------------------------ > The current minimum allocation for Initial IPv6 assignments is a /48 > prefix. While this provides a significant pool of addresses, it can > create challenges for organizations implementing multihoming and > managing multiple sites, particularly for those that are new to IPv6. > > Organizations that qualify for a /23 IPv4 allocation have demonstrably > justified a requirement for more than a single /48 IPv6 address pool. > > A /48 prefix can be cumbersome to subnet efficiently for deployments > across various locations or with multiple internet service providers > (ISPs) in a multihomed environment. This can discourage organizations, > especially new adopters of IPv6, from transitioning due to concerns > about address space management complexity. > > 2. Objective of policy change > -------------------------------- > This proposal advocates for changing the initial allocation of IPv6 > address blocks to /44 from /48 for organizations that are eligible for a > /23 IPv4 allocation under the current APNIC policies. > This proposal aims to achieve greater alignment between IPv6 allocations > and IPv4 delegations [5]. > As per the APNIC Fee Schedule, no additional fee [3] would be required > for this increased allocation. > > 3. Situation in other regions > ------------------------------- > ARIN: Similar policy has been adopted (6.5.8.2. Initial Assignment > Size) [2]. More than 1 but less than or equal to 12 sites justified, > receives a /44 assignment. > > > 4. Proposed Policy Change > ----------------------------- > Current Policy text : > > 8.2. Initial IPv6 allocations [1] > 8.2.1. Account holders with existing IPv4 space > Subject to Section 8.1., existing IPv4 address space may be considered > in determining the initial IPv6 allocation size. APNIC applies a minimum > size for IPv6 allocations to facilitate prefix-based filtering. > APNIC account holders that have been delegated an IPv4 address block > from APNIC, but have no IPv6 space, can qualify for an appropriately > sized IPv6 block under the matching IPv6 policy. For example, an account > holder that has received an IPv4 IXP assignment will be eligible to > receive an IPv6 IXP assignment. > The size of the IPv6 delegation for requestors that meet this criterion > will be based on the following: > * An account holder that has an IPv4 allocation is eligible for a /32 > IPv6 address block. > * An account holder that has an IPv4 assignment is eligible for a /48 > IPv6 address block. > If an APNIC account holder wishes to receive an initial allocation or > assignment larger than the sizes described above, the account holder > will need to apply under the alternative criteria described in Section > 8.2.2. and Section 9.1 below. > > > Policy text will be changed : > * An account holder that has a /24 IPv4 assignment is eligible for a /48 > IPv6 address block. > New Policy text will be added : > * An account holder that has a /23 IPv4 assignment is eligible for a /44 > IPv6 address block. > > > 5. Advantages / Disadvantages > ---------------------------------- > Advantages: > Alignment with IPv4 Allocation: Organizations qualifying for a /23 IPv4 > allocation have demonstrably justified a need for a larger address pool. > Aligning the minimum IPv6 allocation with this level reflects similar > requirements in a larger IPv6 address space. > Improved Efficiency for Multihoming and Multi-site Deployments: A /44 > prefix offers greater flexibility for organizations to subnet and manage > their address space effectively across multiple locations or ISPs in a > multihomed environment. > Encouraging IPv6 Adoption: Increasing the minimum allocation cost (in > terms of address space size) can incentivize new organizations to adopt > IPv6, accelerating the overall transition within the region. > > Disadvantages: > > 6. Impact on resource holders > -------------------------------- > > 7. References > -------------- > [1] Section 8.2 Initial IPv6 allocations. > https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources#a_h_8_2 > > [2] IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the ARIN Region > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/nrpm/nrpm.txt > > [3] APNIC Fee Calculation > https://www.apnic.net/about-apnic/corporate-documents/documents/membership/member-fee-schedule/ > > [4] New Member fee examples > https://www.apnic.net/get-ip/get-ip-addresses-asn/ > > [5] Section 6.1. Minimum and maximum IPv4 delegations > https://www.apnic.net/community/policy/resources#a_h_6_1 > _______________________________________________ > 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]
