--- begin forwarded text X-Authentication-Warning: data.staff.apnic.net: majordom set sender to owner-global-v6@lists.apnic.net using -f To: global-v6@lists.apnic.net Subject: [GLOBAL-V6] FWD: Summary of recent IPv6 discussions within APNIC and RIPE Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 12:27:43 -0400 From: Thomas Narten <narten@watson.ibm.com> Sender: owner-global-v6@lists.apnic.net ------- Forwarded Message From: Thomas Narten <narten@watson.ibm.com> To: v6wg@arin.net Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2001 12:07:11 -0400 Subject: Summary of recent IPv6 discussions within APNIC and RIPE Here is a summary of recent activity related to IPv6 addressing policy. Credit goes to Richard Jimmerson for putting it together with help from RIPE and APNIC. This will serve as background for the upcoming v6 WG meeting in Miami, where these topics will be discussed. Thomas (with WG Chair hat in place) ***** APNIC ***** There was a joint IPv6/Policy session relating to iPv6 address policy held at the last APNIC meeting. During this session there were two separate IPv6 policy proposals made. The following day these two policy proposals were merged. There was consensus that many of the principles outlined in the proposal document were sound, but there was general agreement that further discussion was needed at the global level -- in particular, the initial allocation size from the RIRs. There was consensus that the IPv6 bootstrap period should be extended until the next IPv6 policy is implemented, with the understanding that the next policy takes account of bootstrapping needs. There was consensus to accept the proposal for APNIC to assign IPv6 address space to Internet exchanges. The assignment size agreed upon was a /64. ***** RIPE NCC ***** There were two separate sessions that covered the topic of IPv6 addressing policy -- 1) The IPv6/LIR joint session 2) The IPv6/LIR/EIX joint session 1) The IPv6/LIR joint session discussed the IPv6 policy proposal language, summarized the discussions that took place at the APNIC meeting, and reviewed a proposal submitted by Dave Pratt. There were many similarities between these three offerings. The group seemed to agree on principles such as using the HD-ratio for checking utilization, the fact current IPv4 utilization would be considered when evaluating an initial request for IPv6 address space, and many other points from the IPv6 proposal language, but objected to the references to "slow start," as there was concern the minimum allocation size may be too small and that LIRs would have to return to the RIR too often. One of the main points that was left open and identified as needed further discussion was the initial allocation size from the RIR. It was agreed that this point and others would be best discussed on a global mailing list so the discussions of the three regions remained in sync. It was also decided that the RIRs should continue work on an interim policy document with the help of the community while these discussions are going on. It was felt that even though there are still some open issues, the new proposed policies are much better than what we have now. 2) The IPv6/LIR/EIX joint session discussed the proposed policy of the RIPE NCC assigning IPv6 address space to exchange points. There was much discussion about what size to assign IXes (/64 or /48). It was argued some IXes may need more than a /64, so a /48 should be assigned for purposes of administrative ease. Many people supported this notion, as almost every other type of "site" would receive a /48 anyway. It was also observed that IXes may not even need space from the RIR and that they could use link-local addresses. It was countered that link-local may not work because some exchange customers may want to traceroute to one another. The final consensus was that exchange points should receive their IPv6 address space from a RIR. ------- End of Forwarded Message - - This list (global-v6) is handled by majordomo@lists.apnic.net --- end forwarded text