Erik Bais, Nov 5 th 2014 PP - 2014-12 Allow IPv6 Transfers Presenter : Erik Bais –

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Erik Bais, May 15 th 2013 PP Resource Certification for non-RIPE NCC Members Presenter : Erik Bais –
Advertisements

Registration Services Feedback Andrea Cima RIPE NCC RIPE 66 - Dublin.
The RIPE NCC Update Ingrid Wijte Registration Services Assistant Manager.
Nigel Titley. RIPE 54, 9 May 2007, Tallinn, Estonia. 1 RIPE NCC Certification Task Force Update Presented by Nigel Titley RIPE NCC.
NCC Services to PI Resource Holders RIPE / Dublin Axel Pawlik Randy Bush Services to PI 1.
Erik Bais, May 14 th 2014 PP Allow IPv4 PI transfer Presenter : Erik Bais –
Update about the “SHOULDs Analysing Project” in RIPE Policy Documents “Should” we use the RFC 2119 Defined Language in RIPE Policy Documents? Jan Žorž,
IPv4 Final Distribution Business Processes Andrea Cima, RIPE NCC RIPE 64.
62 Recommended Draft Policy ARIN Resolve Conflict Between RSA and 8.2 Utilization Requirements.
1 Overview of policy proposals Policy SIG Wednesday 26 August 2009 Beijing, China.
Current Policy Topics Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC RIPE Oct - 4 Nov 2011, Vienna.
Tiago Rodrigues Antao. RIPE 45, May 2003, Barcelona. 1 Improved Secure Communication System for RIPE NCC Members Tiago Rodrigues Antao.
1 Axel Pawlik APNIC 22, 8 September 2006, Kaohsiung RIPE NCC Update APNIC 22.
Update on RIPE NCC Inter- RIR Transfer proposal Adam Gosling APNIC 38 Policy SIG Meeting 18 September 2014.
APNIC Policy SIG report: Open Policy Meeting Policy SIG Report Masato Yamanishi, Chair.
Policy Implementation and Experience Report Leslie Nobile.
PDO Activities Emilio Madaio Policy Development Officer RIPE NCC RIPE Oct - 4 Nov 2011, Vienna.
Copyright © 2008 Japan Network Information Center JPNIC's review of IPv4 address transfer  Izumi Okutani  Japan Network Information.
Draft Policy ARIN Resolve Conflict Between RSA and 8.2 Utilization Requirements.
POLICY EXPERIENCE REPORT Leslie Nobile. Review existing policies – Ambiguous text/Inconsistencies/Gaps/Effectiveness Identify areas where new or modified.
Skeeve Stevens APNIC 29, Kuala Lumpur Alternative criteria for subsequent IPv6 allocations Prop-083v002.
Policy implementation and document status report Address Policy SIG APNIC 15, Taipei, Taiwan 27 February 2003.
Regional Internet Registries Statistics & Activities IETF 55 Atlanta Prepared By APNIC, ARIN, LACNIC, RIPE NCC.
Policy Experience Report Leslie Nobile. The PDP Cycle Need Discuss Consensus Implement Evaluate
PROP Leif Sawyer. Draft Policy ARIN Eliminating Needs-based Evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 Netblocks Author:
ARIN Modify section 8.2 to better reflect how ARIN handles reorganizations.
Registration Services Update Guangliang Pan. IPv4 transfers related to final /8 (103/8)
Erik Bais, May 13 th 2015 PP – unassigned yet General Transfer Policy Presenter : Erik Bais –
Feedback from RIPE NCC Registration Services Alex Le Heux, RIPE NCC RIPE64 Ljubljana.
Routing integrity in a world of Bandwidth on Demand Dave Wilson DW238-RIPE
JPNIC Open Policy Meeting Update Yuka Suzuki IP Department Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC) NIR Meeting Aug. 21st, 2003.
The RIPE NCC Update Axel Pawlik Managing Director.
Filiz Yilmaz IGF 2006, Athens RIPE Policy History Focusing on IPv4 Filiz Yilmaz Policy Development Officer
Abuse-c Update Denis Walker Database Department, RIPE NCC.
Rough Edges of Current Policies Alex Le Heux RIPE NCC Rome.
1 IP Address Space Transfer between Existing Taiwan LIRs Dr. Ching-Heng Ku, TWNIC Policy SIG, APNIC 20, Hanoi, Vietnam September 8, 2005.
Skeeve Stevens APNIC 31, Hong Kong Alternative criteria for subsequent IPv6 allocations Prop-083v003.
Policies for ASN Management in the Asia Pacific Region – Revised Draft Address Policy SIG APNIC14, Kitakyushu, Japan 4 Sept 2002.
Erik Bais, May 5 th 2011 PP Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6 Presenter : Erik Bais –
Rob Blokzijl, RIPE 64, April 2012 IPv4 Maintenance Policy.
Current Policy Topics Emilio Madaio RIPE NCC RIPE November 2010, Rome.
Registration Services Feedback Andrea Cima RIPE NCC RIPE 67 - Athens.
IPv4 IXP Address Policy APNIC Policy SIG Meeting Taipei, August 2001 Philip Smith.
Prop-073 Automatic allocation/assignment of IPv6 Terry Manderson Andy Linton.
1 IANA global IPv6 allocation policy [prop-005-v002] Policy SIG 1 Sept 2004 APNIC18, Nadi, Fiji.
JPNIC Update Izumi Okutani Japan Network Information Center APNIC19, NIR SIG.
Abuse-c update Denis Walker Business Analyst RIPE NCC Database Team.
Prop-077: Proposal to supplement transfer policy of historical IPv4 addresses Wendy Zhao Wei, Jane Zhang & Terence Zhang Yinghao.
Contractual Relationship Requirements for End Users Implementation Update: Policy Proposal
1 HD Ratio for IPv4 RIPE 48 May 2004 Amsterdam. 2 Current status APNIC Informational presentation at APNIC 16 Well supported, pending presentation at.
Update from the RIPE NCC Axel Pawlik Managing Director.
Copyright (c) 2002 Japan Network Information Center Proposal for IPv6 Policy for Essential Infrastructure in the AP region Izumi Okutani IP Address Section.
1 APNIC Open Address Policy Meeting Special Interest Group Session March 2nd, Korea, Seoul.
Draft Policy ARIN Christian Tacit. Problem statement Organizations that obtain a 24 month supply of IP addresses via the transfer market and then.
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN
Returned IPv4 Addresses
AfriNIC Transition Plan
Regional Internet Registries
A Coordinated Proposal Regional Internet Registries
APNIC 29 Policy SIG report
Locking down the final /8 Remco van Mook
PP – Resource Authentication Key ( RAK ) code for third party authentication Presenter : Erik Bais –
Policy SIG Open Action Items
PP – RIPE Resource Transfer Policies
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN : Modify 8
Feedback From NCC Registration Services
PP – RIPE Resource Transfer Policies
End of IPv4 … And the road ahead … for AP-WG
RIPE Address Policy Working Group May 22, 2018, Reykjavik
PP Allow AS Number Transfers
Presentation transcript:

Erik Bais, Nov 5 th 2014 PP Allow IPv6 Transfers Presenter : Erik Bais –

Erik Bais, November 5 th 2014 Policy proposal info Author – Erik Bais Current status : Open for Discussion Phase end : 28 November

Erik Bais, November 5 th – 12 Policy proposal In short : Through the PDP process, allow IPv6 space to be transferred, just like IPv4 (PI & PA) in order to be able to maintain an updated registry. The current implementation doesn’t allow IPv6 space to be transferred. 3

Erik Bais, November 5 th 2014 Why this proposal ? Members have to return their (in-use ? ) IPv6 allocation if they want to merge LIR’s.. – If a company would like to consolidate LIR’s after a M&A, relocate their IP administration from entity A to Entity B, they would fall into the policy gap. – As there is no infrastructure sold, it is not an M&A. Consolidation is not a transfer, but treated as such. 4

Erik Bais, November 5 th 2014 Why this proposal ? When you ask the RIPE NCC to merge LIR’s, you get asked: Company A will take over the LIR Account and IPv4 Allocations of Company A (no acquisition between the companies) – This is the case in most of the consolidation cases. 5

Erik Bais, November 5 th 2014 The current issue So if a company with more than 1 LIR wants to close one of the LIR’s via a merger, they are forced to hand back the IPv6 PA allocation from the closing LIR. Even if they have deployed IPv6, because it is not seen as a merger, it is treated as a transfer.. 6

Erik Bais, November 5 th 2014 What is the goal of the company The goal is to reduce LIR’s and list all number resources under 1 LIR. – Move to a 1 Entity, 1 LIR, 1 Administration point situation. 7

Erik Bais, November 5 th 2014 Why does the RIPE NCC work like this ? There is an operational procedure for M&A’s which clearly states that infrastructure needs to be involved to be applicable as a M&A. Solution for IPv4 : tag the change as a transfer. Issue: There is no policy to transfer for IPv6, so you need to hand it back to the RIPE NCC. 8

Erik Bais, November 5 th 2014 What might be the result ? Some companies might get the funny idea to request their upstream to transfer their /48 to them. -=> De-Aggregation Not doing transfers, doesn’t stop Upstreams to not de-aggregate their announcements either, so impact to current practise, probably low. 9

Erik Bais, November 5 th 2014 What might be the result ? Companies can consolidate their LIR’s within a corporate structure, without the requirement to re-do their already implemented IPv6 implementation … 10

Erik Bais, November 5 th 2014 The goal of this proposal is: To get IPv6 and IPv4 space on the same track and allow them both to be transferred. Don’t make things more complicated than required. Avoid ways to work the system or policies that don’t benefit registry accuracy. 11

Erik Bais, November 5 th 2014 What do you think ? In order to get your feedback on the topic : Send your comments to before 28 November This could be as simple as : – I support the policy. 12

Questions?