Re: [sig-policy] prop-041-v001: IPv6 assignment size to critical infrastructure

[Philip Smith <pfs@cisco.com>]

The modification to the existing text seems sensible to me, I support.

philip
--

Toshiyuki Hosaka said the following on 8/8/06 22:09:
> Dear SIG members
> 
> The proposal "IPv6 assignment size to critical infrastructure" was sent
> to the Policy SIG Chair and Co-chairs yesterday. We are now forwarding
> it to the Policy SIG for review. It will be presented at the Policy SIG
> at APNIC 22 in Kaohsiung, Taiwan, 4-8 September 2006. You are invited
> to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list before the
> meeting.
> 
> The proposal's history can be found at:
> 
>        http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/proposals/prop-041-v001.html
> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Toshiyuki Hosaka
> Policy SIG
> hosaka@nic.ad.jp
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> 
> prop-041-v001: IPv6 assignment size to critical infrastructure
> ________________________________________________________________________
> 
> 
> 
> Author:    APNIC Secretariat
>            <secretariat@apnic.net>
> 
> Version:   1
> 
> Date:      7 August 2006
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Introduction
> ------------
> 
> This policy proposes a clarification of the APNIC policy for IPv6
> portable assignments to critical infrastructure networks operating in
> the Asia Pacific region.
> 
> 
> Summary of the current problem
> ------------------------------
> 
> The current policy for critical infrastructure assignments in section
> 5.8.2 of APNIC document, "IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy"
> (http://www.apnic.net/docs/policy/ipv6-address-policy.html#5.8.2)
> states:
> 
>     "The minimum assignment made under these terms is /32."
> 
> Since this policy became active, requests have been received for
> multiple /32 assignments in cases where infrastructure operators have
> multiple POPs or servers providing secondary services.  While the
> policy is ambiguous in this regard, the APNIC secretariat deemed that
> additional /32 assignments are not warranted in such cases, due to the
> large amount of address space involved and the potentially large number
> of such requests.
> 
> 
> Situation in other RIRs
> -----------------------
> 
> AfriNIC:     no specific policy
> 
> ARIN:        /48 minimum assignment per POP
> 
> LACNIC:      /48 minimum, /32 maximum micro allocation to critical
>              Internet infrastructure operators only
> 
> RIPE NCC:    minimum allocation size at time of request
> 
> 
> Proposal
> --------
> 
> It is proposed that section 5.8.2 of APNIC document "IPv6 Address
> Allocation and Assignment Policy" remains except to modify the last
> sentence to read:
> 
>     "The maximum assignment made under these terms is /32 per operator."
> 
> 
> 
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
>