Re: The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy
Pekka Savola <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.apnic.global-v6 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003, Izumi Okutani wrote: > Sorry for a late response - I was on vacation. > > The case we have in Japan is a network with over 1M customers planning > to provide a new service(not a connection service) restricted only to > their existing customers. Since the customers have their own private > networks, it will lead to address duplication if the service provider > uses private addresses for their new service. Furthermore, they may be > connected to the global internet in the future to inter-connect their > customers with other ISPs. Although it is not a fixed plan, they wish > to avoid renumbering 1M customers if they decide to establish the > global connection. > > I think this justifies their needs for globally unique addresses. What > do you think? I would say that this qualifies them to get 1M regular, no-frills, LIR addresses from APNIC. I see zero need for any kind of local addresses (which was what Brian was asking, I think). Nothing prevents you from *not* routing those addresses on the Internet? Unless of course it's a problem in the global-v6 policy, which should then be reviewed. > > Izumi > > From: Brian E Carpenter <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [GLOBAL-V6]The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy > Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 13:13:32 +0200 > > > Izumi, > > > > I think that it would be very interesting for the IETF discussion if > > you could give a short explanation of this need (in a form that can > > be discussed in public). One of the issues in the IETF debate is that > > not everybody agrees that there is a real need for local addresses. > > > > By the way, I think it is fine for the issue to be on your list; > > but until the IETF reaches a conclusion, it is hard to discuss policy, > > since there is no technical specification. > > > > Regards > > > > Brian > > > > Izumi Okutani wrote: > > > > > > I simply listed this since there is a specific need in Japan for a > > > closed network. I didn't conciously distinguish registry and IETF > > > issues. Thought it is worth the introduction as it will affect > > > registries once implemented. > > > > > > Izumi > > > > > > From: Geoff Huston <gih-pWIpc5MZKA/[email protected]> > > > Subject: Re: [GLOBAL-V6]The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy > > > Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 17:16:19 +1000 > > > > > > > I believe it _could_ be a registry issue, but along the lines you > > > > are describing Brian, rather than a "should be allowed" question. > > > > > > > > http://www.apnic.net/meetings/16/programme/sigs/docs/policy/addpol-pres-huston-unique-local-ipv6-unicast-add.pdf > > > > > > > > describes some thinking about the local use proposal that was aired > > > > at the recent APNIC meeting > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > > Geoff > > > > > > > > At 04:26 PM 4/09/2003 +0200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > > > >3-3-1 Define if address for closed networks should be allowed in IPv6 > > > > > > > > > >I don't quite understand why this is a registry issue. It is in fact > > > > >the topic being vigorously debated in the IETF IPv6 WG at the moment > > > > >(under the general heading of local addresses). Once the IETF has > > > > >reached a technical conclusion, there may well be an IANA & RIR > > > > >issue, but not yet. > > > > > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > > > > >Izumi Okutani wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think there are a few more issues still (I don't think the list claims > > > > > > > to be all-inclusive of course :-), like: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - experimental allocations?!? > > > > > > > - allocations to "critical infrastructures" (whatever those might be) > > > > > > > - allocations to IX fabrics for non-routable addresses > > > > > > Thanks for the note, Pekka. > > > > > > > > > > > > These policies are already implemented in the AP region, but I assume > > > > > > they are under discussions in other regions? In anycase, I am > > > > > > interested to hear comments about them too. > > > > > > > > > > > > Like this case, I am happy to add any other issues that happen to slip > > > > > > out of the list. > > > > > > > > > > > > > As a brief comment, the table may not really give enough context to know > > > > > > > which specific problem you're talking about in those cases (in many cases > > > > > > > it's more or less guessable, but not always) > > > > > > Yes, I see your point. I hope my presentation posted in APNIC meeting > > > > > > page gives you a better picture. > > > > > > > > > > > > "Summary of the current issues on IPv6 policy" (msword, mspowerpoint, pdf) > > > > > > http://www.apnic.net/meetings/16/programme/sigs/policy.html > > > > > > > > > > > > Izumi > > > > > > > > > > > > > HTH > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Izumi Okutani <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [GLOBAL-V6]The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy > > > > > > > > Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:10:01 +0900 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure, Mat. > > > > > > > > > I'll put it up on the web shortly and notify the URL once it's fixed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Izumi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [GLOBAL-V6]The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy > > > > > > > > > Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 10:06:43 +0100 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Izumi, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please make this list available on the web for those of us who > > > > > don't > > > > > > > > > > support your chosen filetype. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mat. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > > From: Izumi Okutani [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > > > > > > > > Sent: 01 September 2003 07:32 > > > > > > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > Subject: [GLOBAL-V6]The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Attached is a summarised list of the current issues in IPv6 > > > > > > > > > > > policy, based on > > > > > > > > > > > discussions in this ML & feebacks from the Japanese community.The > > > > > > > > > > > second(Comments) sheet quotes the actual comments related to > > > > > > > > > > > the issues. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would love to hear your commnets on the issues listed, > > > > > > > > > > > especially those > > > > > > > > > > > categorised as priority "1". For example, one of the causes > > > > > of the > > > > > > > > > > > psychological barrier in initial allocations is > > > > > > > > > > > misunderstanding of the > > > > > > > > > > > intention of the criteria.APNIC regions will partly address > > > > > this by > > > > > > > > > > > developing a guidelines document, but perhaps, improving the > > > > > > > > > > > wordings in the > > > > > > > > > > > poicy is also worth considering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Izumi > > > > > > > > > > > JPNIC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > global-v6 mailing list > > > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the > > > > > > > Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." > > > > > > > Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > global-v6 mailing list > > > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > global-v6 mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6 > > > -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings _______________________________________________ global-v6 mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6