Izumi Okutani | 1 Sep 08:32 2003
Picon

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
Attachment (v6-issues_final.xls): application/vnd.ms-excel, 59 KiB
matthew.ford | 1 Sep 11:06 2003

RE: The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy

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:izumi@...] 
> Sent: 01 September 2003 07:32
> To: global-v6@...
> 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
(Continue reading)

Izumi Okutani | 2 Sep 12:10 2003
Picon

RE: The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy

Sure, Mat.
I'll put it up on the web shortly and notify the URL once it's fixed.

Izumi

From: matthew.ford@...
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:izumi@...] 
> > Sent: 01 September 2003 07:32
> > To: global-v6@...
> > 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
(Continue reading)

Izumi Okutani | 3 Sep 11:17 2003
Picon

RE: The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy

Hi all,

I have posted the list of IPv6 issues below:

 http://www.nic.ad.jp/ja/ipv6/v6-issues-final.html

Izumi

From: Izumi Okutani <izumi@...>
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: matthew.ford@...
> 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.
> > 
(Continue reading)

Pekka Savola | 3 Sep 13:41 2003
Picon

RE: The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy

On Wed, 3 Sep 2003, Izumi Okutani wrote:
> I have posted the list of IPv6 issues below:
> 
>  http://www.nic.ad.jp/ja/ipv6/v6-issues-final.html

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

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)

HTH

> From: Izumi Okutani <izumi@...>
> 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: matthew.ford@...
> > Subject: RE: [GLOBAL-V6]The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy
> > Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 10:06:43 +0100 
(Continue reading)

Izumi Okutani | 4 Sep 07:14 2003
Picon

RE: The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy

> 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 <izumi@...>
> > Subject: RE: [GLOBAL-V6]The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy
(Continue reading)

Brian E Carpenter | 4 Sep 16:26 2003
Picon

Re: The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy

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)
(Continue reading)

Geoff Huston | 5 Sep 09:16 2003
Picon

Re: The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy

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)
(Continue reading)

Izumi Okutani | 5 Sep 10:12 2003
Picon

Re: The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy

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@...>
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
(Continue reading)

Brian E Carpenter | 5 Sep 13:13 2003
Picon

Re: The list of current Issues in IPv6 Policy

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@...>
> 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.
(Continue reading)


Gmane