minutes

Hi,

this may be a dump question , but does any body care
to say that why RIRs or IANA itself should have this
responsibility to IPv6 address space allocation?
well, I know there has been a problem regarding IPv4
and that was limited address space which was available
using IPv4.with IPv6 we do not have such problem
then why should the things go on exactly as it was in IPv4?
as Telecom engineer I know that the things is so easy when
I am going to design a numbering/routing plan for telephony
services. prefix "98 " is allocated  to my country and deciding
about the rest of number space (address space) is my business
I am not going to get approval from ITU to allocate 98 31 to
Isfehan for example, it is not ITU's business to care about the
numbers that is assigned to end users in Iran.  and I am not asked
to report the address space consumption status to ITU.
why shouldn't the things go on exactly the same while we have
enough address space in IPv6?
It is said that we would have enough address space to allocate to
people who may live in moon or mars! let's leave it for future
and just allocate address space for countries and end the allocation
story there , address space is a resource just like frequency band width
in US it FCC who should care about this and in Iran ,  PTT will decide
how to use this resource.

Best Regards
Hamid Alipour

----- Original Message -----
From: David Kessens <david at qip.Qwest.net>
To: <ipv6-wg at ripe.net>
Cc: <meeting at ripe.net>
Sent: Friday, January 21, 2000 8:27 AM
Subject: minutes


>
> Hi,
>
> Please see below for the minutes of our last session.
>
> I would like to thank Petra Zeidler for taking and preparing the
> minutes.
>
> I would like to declare them the final version if I don't receive any
> major comments until January 31.
>
> Thanks,
>
> David K.
> PS I will not be very responsive for the next weeks due to a vacation
> ---
>
> Slides available from http://whois.6bone.net/~david/presentations/
>
> Minutes of the IPv6 WG meeting at RIPE 34
>
> Agenda:
>
> A.  Administrative Stuff
> Scribe is Petra Zeidler
> Agenda got reshuffled, beside that no changes
>
>
> B.  Status of 6BONE (David Kessens)
> see slides for the contents of the presentation
> no Questions
>
>
> C.  Experience from the RIPE NCC with IPv6 allocations (Mirjam Kuehne)
>
http://www.ripe.net/meetings/ripe/ripe-34/pres/ipv6-alloc-experience/index.h
tml
>     Questions:
> - Does RIPE NCC look at IPv4 allocations when deciding about IPv6
> alloc.? - no, one can start out with IPv6 address space
> - How long does getting an allocation take? - about as long as a large
> IPv4 assignement now, but in the beginning it took longer due to
> necessary shakedown of procedures
> - What about the "exchange points distribute address space" point? -
> Neither the exchanges nor the registries are particularily keen to see
> that, maybe clear that up in the documentation
> - is the problem of how to handle different address spaces at the
> client site, their upstream and the exchange point worked out? - no.
> Input from the Exchange people needed, the IX wg is in parallel to
> this meeting
> - how does one find IPv6 database objects in the database? - by using
> whois, the object types are inet6num and ipv6site
>
>
> D.  Experience from APNIC with IPv6 allocations (Fabrina Hossain)
> http://www.ripe.net/meetings/ripe/ripe-34/pres/apnic-ipv6/index.html
> Questions:
> - what is a NIR, and what's the IPv6 problem with them? - a national
> internet registry, an intermediary between RIR and LIR; assigning a
> block of STLAs is not planned in the current regulations, but would be
> sensible. This point needs to be cleared up yet.
> - are there political problems with or for NIRs? - none up to date
> - what type of IPv6 usage happens in the APNIC region? - tunneled over
> IPv4
>
>
> E.  Experience from customers of the RIPE NCC with IPv6 allocations
(audience)
>     Stephen Burley, UUnet UK:
> requested at 3 registries due to their international character, got
> /35. Issues are Aggregation and looking at a whole continent
> /29 is reserved for them so they can expand contiguously
> UUnet is still staring up IPv6 operations, they have renumbered from
> their 6bone addresses and had questions from customers about IPv6, but
> did no assignments yet.
> general point:
> what about company mergers and splits? - renumbering is easy in theory
> Wilfried Woeber for Vienna Uni, RIPE IPv6 allocation #6:
> IPv6 requires quite different architecture considerations regarding
> wether to assign a /64 or a /48
> actually using IPv6 found surprising, non-obvious traps (eg DNS)
> working with RIPE to get the allocation was nice
> planning for IPv6 is hard to do due to lack of experience on all sides
> the role of IXes is unclear. Are they to move from being a switch to
> being a router? How does one build infrastructure for a routed IX?
> What about the IPv6 multihoming issue? For an IXes own routing
> infrastructure there are no address issues
>
>
> F.  IPv6 forum creation (David Kessens)
> there has been a mailinglist created ~2-3 months ago with subject
> deployment of IPv6. It contains technical questions & answers
> There's a website too, http://www.ipv6.org/
> It is meant to be a formal organisation to promote IPv6
> It currently has 55 members, the membership fee is ~$2500 a year)
> The IPv6 forum sponsors meetings to spread information about IPv6
> It has two main goals: inform and help in deployment by collecting
> useful information
>     next meeting will be in October near Paris named "Global IPv6 summit"
> on the 8/9 dec there will be a meeting in Berlin to be help in German
> language, but translations will be offered too
> a meeting in Japan is planned, but there's no date yet
>
>
> H.  IPv6 test project done by TF-TANT
>     (Simon Nybroe,
http://www.tbit.dk/quantum/slides/ripe34qtpv6/index.htm)
> Questions/comments:
> DNS still needs IPv4 connectivity to be able to do its "tree walk"
> There are more applications needed that work with IPv6
> A IPv6 routing registry needs to be considered
>
>
> G.  European developments/initiatives regarding IPv6
> - there's a project to link 6TAP and AMS-IX using a native IPv6 link
> AMS-IX has IPv6 on the Ethernet and at 6TAP it's available over the
> peering router.
> Question: is it an experiment or are there plans to offer "ordinary"
> transit? - no transit yet, currently it will run in a ~3month test
> period
>
>
> X.  Any Other Business
> - there's IPv6 in the RIPE terminal room, with www.ipv6.surfnet.nl as
> tunnel router
> - IPv6 policies are to be dicussed in the LIR WG, only implementation
> matters at IPv6 WG, as IPv6 is now in assignment production.
> Anyone may take part in the LIR WG (only the LIRs really ought to :-)
>
>
> --
>