[122999] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brandon Kim)
Fri Feb 26 08:49:23 2010
From: Brandon Kim <brandon.kim@brandontek.com>
To: <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 08:47:57 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4B87B875.6000509@tuenti.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Interesting=2C why is it causing quite a stir? Is it because they are tryin=
g to allocate a large
pool of addresses?
Date: Fri=2C 26 Feb 2010 13:03:01 +0100
From: awaite@tuenti.com
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: [Fwd: [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The IT=
U IPv6 Group]
I didn't see this on NANOG yet=2C but it's caused a stir on the RIPE list.
=20
=20
--Forwarded Message Attachment--
From: ncc@ripe.net
To: ncc-announce@ripe.net
Date: Thu=2C 25 Feb 2010 17:20:18 +0100
Subject: [Admin] [members-discuss] [ncc-announce] RIPE NCC Position On The =
ITU IPv6 Group
Dear Colleagues=2C
=20
As you may be aware=2C the International Telecommunication Union's (ITU) =20
Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (TSB) has convened an ITU =20
IPv6 Group=2C the first meeting of which will be held on 15-16 March =20
2010 in Geneva=2C Switzerland. Information on this group is available at:
http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/othergroups/ipv6/
=20
Among the group's Terms of Reference are the following:
=20
* To draft a global policy proposal for the reservation of a large =20
IPv6 block=2C taking into consideration the future needs of developing =20
countries (as outlined in paragraph 23 of ITU document C09/29).
=20
* To further study possible methodologies and related =20
implementation mechanisms to ensure 'equitable access' to IPv6 =20
resource by countries.
=20
* To further study the possibility for ITU to become another =20
Internet Registry=2C and propose policies and procedures for ITU to =20
manage a reserved IPv6 block.
=20
* To further study the feasibility and advisability of implementing =20
the CIR [Country Internet Registry] model for those countries who =20
would request national allocations.
=20
The ITU IPv6 Group is open to ITU Member States and Sector Members of =20
ITU-T and ITU-D. RIRs that are not members have also been extended an =20
invitation to participate.
=20
IPv6 address policy is clearly of critical importance to the RIPE NCC =20
membership=2C and the unsympathetic implementation of any of the Terms =20
of Reference stated above would have serious impact on the global IP =20
address distribution environment.
=20
Members of RIPE NCC staff will be participating in this meeting of the =20
ITU IPv6 Group to represent the interests of our members and community.
=20
The position of the RIPE NCC is based on support for smooth and =20
reliable working of the Internet globally=2C and for the bottom-up=2C open =
=20
policy development process that allows for all stakeholders=2C including =20
business=2C government and the technical community=2C to participate.
=20
Some of the issues addressed in the Terms of Reference listed above =20
are a cause for concern because they could directly affect the RIPE =20
NCC operations as a Regional Internet Registry (RIR). Therefore=2C the =20
RIPE NCC position on the Terms of Reference is as follows:
=20
* The needs of developing economies in IP address policy are =20
important. Network operators in these economies have fair and equal =20
access to IPv6 resources from the Regional Internet Registries (RIRs)=2C =20
and to the Policy Development Processes in their RIR and globally. =20
Each of the RIRs has been allocated an equal block of IPv6 to =20
distribute to networks in their region. (eg. AfriNIC has been =20
allocated the same sized block of IPv6 as the RIPE NCC).
=20
* IPv6 allocations made by RIRs to date amount to the equivalent of =20
500 times the size of the entire IPv4 address pool=2C allocated to =20
networks in over 150 economies.
=20
* If a significant sector in the Internet community feels that the =20
"reservation of a large IPv6 block" for "the future needs of =20
developing countries" is warranted=2C the open=2C bottom-up Policy =20
Development Processes (PDPs) of the RIRs provide an appropriate forum =20
in which to argue that case and develop such a policy.
=20
* The RIRs=2C as the recognised stewards of Internet Number Resources=2C =20
are working=2C individually=2C jointly=2C and with invited experts=2C to =20
engage the ITU membership. We have closely followed discussions in the =20
ITU to date. The RIPE NCC does not believe that there are any problems =20
that would be solved by the shift to a country-based allocation system =20
or the installation of the ITU as an Internet Registry.
=20
The purpose of this email is to ensure that all RIPE NCC members are =20
informed of the RIPE NCC's participation in this ITU IPv6 Group=2C and =20
our position. If you have any comments or questions regarding this =20
information=2C please send an email to <ncc@ripe.net>.
=20
Kind regards=2C
=20
Axel Pawlik
Managing Director
RIPE NCC
=20
=20
=20
=20
----=20
If you don't want to receive mails from the RIPE NCC Members Discuss list=
=2C 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.=20
=
