Re: [nznog] [AusNOG] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
As usual Mark, your contributions are unbiased and well thought out. ...Skeeve -- Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists skeeve(a)eintellego.net / www.eintellego.net Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954 Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve ; facebook.com/eintellego -- NOC, NOC, who's there?
-----Original Message----- From: Mark Smith [mailto:nanog(a)85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org] Sent: Saturday, 27 February 2010 1:24 PM To: Skeeve Stevens Cc: apnic-talk(a)apnic.net; ausnog(a)ausnog.net; nznog; pacnog(a)pacnog.org Subject: Re: [AusNOG] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 12:08:19 +1100 Skeeve Stevens
wrote: This is an FYI for those interested. Btw, RIPE NCC is the European version of APNIC for those that don't know.
The ITU are looking at bypassing the RIR's (Ripe, APNIC, ARIN, AFRINIC, LACNIC) and becoming their own numbering authority. Clearly this is not the desired option as the structure already exists for exactly what they want to do, but rather than regionally, they want to do it per country.... for who knows what reason.
Because they're bellheads.
-- Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists skeeve(a)eintellego.net / www.eintellego.net Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954 Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve ; facebook.com/eintellego -- NOC, NOC, who's there?
-----Original Message----- From: admin-bounces(a)tuenti.com [mailto:admin-bounces(a)tuenti.com] On Behalf Of Axel Pawlik Sent: Friday, 26 February 2010 3:20 AM To: ncc-announce(a)ripe.net Subject: [Admin] [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The ITU IPv6 Group
Dear Colleagues,
As you may be aware, the International Telecommunication Union's (ITU) Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (TSB) has convened an ITU IPv6 Group, the first meeting of which will be held on 15-16 March 2010 in Geneva, Switzerland. Information on this group is available at: http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/othergroups/ipv6/
Among the group's Terms of Reference are the following:
* To draft a global policy proposal for the reservation of a large IPv6 block, taking into consideration the future needs of developing countries (as outlined in paragraph 23 of ITU document C09/29).
* To further study possible methodologies and related implementation mechanisms to ensure 'equitable access' to IPv6 resource by countries.
* To further study the possibility for ITU to become another Internet Registry, and propose policies and procedures for ITU to manage a reserved IPv6 block.
* To further study the feasibility and advisability of implementing the CIR [Country Internet Registry] model for those countries who would request national allocations.
The ITU IPv6 Group is open to ITU Member States and Sector Members of ITU-T and ITU-D. RIRs that are not members have also been extended an invitation to participate.
IPv6 address policy is clearly of critical importance to the RIPE NCC membership, and the unsympathetic implementation of any of the Terms of Reference stated above would have serious impact on the global IP address distribution environment.
Members of RIPE NCC staff will be participating in this meeting of the ITU IPv6 Group to represent the interests of our members and community.
The position of the RIPE NCC is based on support for smooth and reliable working of the Internet globally, and for the bottom-up, open policy development process that allows for all stakeholders, including business, government and the technical community, to participate.
Some of the issues addressed in the Terms of Reference listed above are a cause for concern because they could directly affect the RIPE NCC operations as a Regional Internet Registry (RIR). Therefore, the RIPE NCC position on the Terms of Reference is as follows:
* The needs of developing economies in IP address policy are important. Network operators in these economies have fair and equal access to IPv6 resources from the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs), and to the Policy Development Processes in their RIR and globally. Each of the RIRs has been allocated an equal block of IPv6 to distribute to networks in their region. (eg. AfriNIC has been allocated the same sized block of IPv6 as the RIPE NCC).
* IPv6 allocations made by RIRs to date amount to the equivalent of 500 times the size of the entire IPv4 address pool, allocated to networks in over 150 economies.
* If a significant sector in the Internet community feels that the "reservation of a large IPv6 block" for "the future needs of developing countries" is warranted, the open, bottom-up Policy Development Processes (PDPs) of the RIRs provide an appropriate forum in which to argue that case and develop such a policy.
* The RIRs, as the recognised stewards of Internet Number Resources, are working, individually, jointly, and with invited experts, to engage the ITU membership. We have closely followed discussions in the ITU to date. The RIPE NCC does not believe that there are any problems that would be solved by the shift to a country-based allocation system or the installation of the ITU as an Internet Registry.
The purpose of this email is to ensure that all RIPE NCC members are informed of the RIPE NCC's participation in this ITU IPv6 Group, and our position. If you have any comments or questions regarding this information, please send an email to
. Kind regards,
Axel Pawlik Managing Director RIPE NCC
---- If you don't want to receive mails from the RIPE NCC Members Discuss list, please log in to your LIR Portal account at: http://lirportal.ripe.net/ First click on General and then click on Edit. At the bottom of the Page you can add or remove addresses. _______________________________________________ AusNOG mailing list AusNOG(a)lists.ausnog.net http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
Skeeve, Sorry about the cross-posting but I will only do this once. (Maybe it's time for a worldnog list.) On 2010-02-27 15:59, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
As usual Mark, your contributions are unbiased and well thought out.
...
-----Original Message----- From: Mark Smith [mailto:nanog(a)85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org] Sent: Saturday, 27 February 2010 1:24 PM To: Skeeve Stevens
...
Because they're bellheads.
If that's the statement you're reacting to, I think this comment is in fact objective and well thought out, even if expressed flippantly. It is *exactly* because ITU policy is derived from the obsolete model of national monopolists and geographically based network topology that this particular idea has been floating around inside the ITU since about 2005 to my personal knowledge, and probably longer. I spent quite some time while IETF Chair trying to explain to senior people at ITU why it was a pointless and unnecessary mechanism, but without success.
From what I have seen during the recent survey of ISPs, there is manifestly no need for any major change in IPv6 allocation mechanisms. The RIRs are clearly doing an excellent job of allocating adequate prefixes to those who need them.
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-carpenter-v6ops-isp-scenarios Brian
participants (2)
-
Brian E Carpenter
-
Skeeve Stevens