APNIC Policy SIG1 5 th APNIC Address Policy SIG Report March 7, 2002 Takashi Arano Address Policy SIG Chair Asia Global Crossing

APNIC Policy SIG2 History 1 st SIG:Korea, Mar nd SIG:Brisbane, Oct rd SIG: KL, Mar th SIG: Taipei, Aug th SIG: Bangkok, Mar. 2002

APNIC Policy SIG3 Agenda (IPv6) IPv6 policy - Interim policy document Summary of the draft Anne Lord, APNIC Recent discussion and proposal Kosuke Ito, IPv6 Promotion Council of Japan The editorial team of IPv6 global policy Large space IPv4 trial usage program for future IPv6 deployment Kosuke Ito, IPv6 Promotion Council of Japan

APNIC Policy SIG4 Agenda (IPv4)  AS number policy – Anne Lord, APNIC  Revised IPv4 policy document – summary – Gerard Ross, APNIC  RFC2050 revision – Cathy Wittbrodt, Packet Design  Broadband WG updates - Cable/ADSL policy – Takashi Arano, BB WG co-chair – Amendment proposal: Maemura Akinori, JPNIC IP Committee

APNIC Policy SIG5 IPv6 Policy Draft published by the editorial team last December Issues identified in RIPE 41 and the global ML Initial Allocation Criteria: consensus for the editorial team ’ s suggestion see the next page Use of HD ratio: Consensus Requirement to LIR in sub-allocation: Consensus General consensus for the whole draft with amendment about initial allocation criteria in AP region Some editorial changes needed

APNIC Policy SIG6 Initial Allocation Criteria in IPv6 policy 776 sites in current draft are too high! Editorial team suggests Only LIR can get a /32, but not end users. LIR is an IR that primarily assigns address space to the users of the network services that it provides. at least 200 assignments over the next two years Be subject to be reclaimed if the requirements not satisfactory.

APNIC Policy SIG7 AS Policy Clarifying the current practices as a policy rather than creating a new policy. Registration of routing policy was mandatory in the original draft, but the wording will be changed to “ should be ” Consensus reached with the above amendment

APNIC Policy SIG8 Broadband WG - Cable/ADSL guideline Already two years passed since the first proposal NO MORE DELAY Three items remaining at Taipei meeting Obligation of Customer list submission: Consensus is “ should be optional ” Assignment Justification: keep the original proposal and continue to discuss in the ML(1:1 OK, larger needs justification) Registration threshold: keep the original proposal (/29 and shorter need to be registered) Proposals for changes from JP were rejected. RIR/NIR consideration for LIR ’ s address shortage during evaluation will be discussed more. Draft guideline will be revised and published soon.

APNIC Policy SIG9 Observations and Suggestions by Chair Fewer presentations than before … More Asian Pacific voices expected … Everything in one day was tough Why not have two slots in the first day and one slot in the next? Any volunteer for co-chair? New WG proposal?

APNIC Policy SIG10 Thank you for your contributions ! See you at Next APNIC Open Policy Meeting Any Question and Comments are welcome. Please Send to