CARVIEW

MOTORHOMES

Select Language

HTTP/2 200 date: Mon, 14 Jul 2025 00:55:05 GMT content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8 cf-ray: 95ed0d716b4795be-BLR cf-cache-status: DYNAMIC last-modified: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 05:36:37 GMT vary: Accept-Encoding x-content-type-options: nosniff strict-transport-security: max-age=15552000; preload server: cloudflare content-encoding: gzip [sig-policy] prop-082: Removing aggregation criteria for IPv6 initial al

[sig-policy] prop-082: Removing aggregation criteria for IPv6 initial al

To: Policy SIG <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
Subject: [sig-policy] prop-082: Removing aggregation criteria for IPv6 initial allocations
From: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 03:09:12 -0700
Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
List-archive: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4B67BA54.6050903@apnic.net>
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)

The proposal, 'Removing aggregation criteria for IPv6 initial
allocations', has been sent to the Policy SIG for review. It will be
presented at the Policy SIG at APNIC 29 in Kuala Lumpur, 1-5 March 2010.
We invite you to review and comment on the proposal on the mailing list
before the meeting.
The comment period on the mailing list before an APNIC meeting is an
important part of the policy development process. 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 and other policy proposals is available from:
       https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals
Randy, Ching-Heng, and Terence
________________________________________________________________________
prop-082-v001: Removing aggregation criteria for IPv6 initial
                allocations
________________________________________________________________________
Author:       Tomohiro Fujisaki <fujisaki at syce dot net>
Co-authors:   Akira Nakagawa
              Fuminori Tanizaki
              Masaru Akai
              Toshio Tachibana
Version:      1
Date:         2 February 2010
1.  Introduction
----------------
This is a proposal to remove the aggregation requirement from the IPv6
initial allocation policy.
2.  Summary of the current problem
----------------------------------
The initial IPv6 address allocation criteria requires that LIRs:
     "Plan to provide IPv6 connectivity to organizations to which it will
     make assignments, by advertising that connectivity through its
     single aggregated address allocation."[1]
However, there is no similar aggregation requirement in either the
criteria for subsequent allocations, or in the new IPv6 allocation
criteria for APNIC Members.
Including the aggregation requirement is problematic for two reasons:
     1. It is inconsistent with the criteria for IPv6 allocations under
        two other APNIC policies, which do not require aggregation. These
        policies are:
        - Subsequent IPv6 allocations
        - The new kickstart IPv6 allocation criteria to be
          implemented 10 February 2010 [2]
     2. Registry policy should not concern itself strongly with routing
        issues.
3.  Situation in other RIRs
---------------------------
LACNIC:
     The LACNIC community is currently discussing the following proposal
     to remove the requirement to announce an initial allocation as a
     single prefix in favour of announcing the prefix with the minimum
     possible level of disaggregation:
         2007-01: Modifications to the IPv6 Prefix Initial Allocation
         Policy
         <https://www.lacnic.net/documentos/politicas/
         LAC-2007-01v3-propuesta-en.pdf>
RIPE:
     The RIPE community has recently removed routing requirements from
     its IPv6 policy:
         2009-06: Removing Routing Requirements from the IPv6 Address
         Allocation Policy
         <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2009-06.html>
AfriNIC and ARIN initial IPv6 allocation criteria require a plan to
aggregate, with no aggregation requirement for subsequent allocation
criteria. Neither RIR has any proposal to modify these criteria.
4.  Details
-----------
This is a proposal to:
4.1 Remove the requirement under the initial IPv6 allocation criteria to
     aggregate an initial IPv6 allocation as a single prefix.
4.2 Include a stronger recommendation about the importance of
     aggregation to the IPv6 policy document.
     The APNIC IPv6 policy document currently does include information
     about the importance of aggregation[3]. However, it is the opinion
     of this proposal's authors that the recommendation should be more
     strongly expressed.
5.  Pros/Cons
-------------
5.1 Advantages
     - This policy lowers the barriers for obtaining IPv6 address.
     - Other RIR communities are discussing removing aggregation
       requirements from their policies, so it would be appropriate for
       APNIC policy to maintain similar criteria to other regions.
5.2 Disadvantages
     - By removing the aggregation requirement in the policy,
       deaggregated routes may begin to be announced more frequently.
6.  Effect on APNIC Members
---------------------------
None.
7.  Effect on NIRs
------------------
None.
8.  References
--------------
[1] See section 5.2.1, "IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy"
     <https://www.apnic.net/policy/ipv6-address-policy#5.2.1>
[2] prop-073: Simplifying allocation/assignment of IPv6 to APNIC Members
     with existing IPv4 addresses
     <https://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-073>
[3] See section 3.4, "IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy"
     <https://www.apnic.net/policy/ipv6-address-policy#3.4>

Original Source | Taken Source