Minutes

IPv6 technical SIG

Wednesday 1 September 2004, Sheraton Fiji Resort, Nadi, Fiji

Meeting commenced: 11:17 am

Chair: Kazu Yamamoto

The Chair introduced the session and thanked the sponsors.

Review of previous open action items

  • None

Contents

  1. IPv6 allocation status report
  2. IPv6 /48 assignment status report
  3. Guidelines for ISPs on IPv6 assignment to customers
  4. An update on operational recommendations for IPv6 for TLDs and other servers
  5. IPv6 DNS server deployment in Korea
  6. Update on multihoming activity in the IETF
  7. Deployment plans behind larger IPv6 allocations
  1. IPv6 allocation status report

  2. George Kuo, APNIC

    Presentation [pdf | ppt]

    This presentation describes IPv6 allocation and assignment information from APNIC, as well as relevant IPv6 routing table statistics. Currently, APNIC has made 164 allocations of IPv6 space. The statistics show that in the AP region, Japan continues to hold the greatest amount of address space, followed by Korea and Taiwan. So far, 55 of the 60 organisations that received a /35 allocation made under the original policy have returned to upgrade their allocation to /32.

    Questions and discussion

    • None.

    Action items

    • None.

    Top

  3. IPv6 /48 assignment status report

  4. Toshiyuki Hosaka, JPNIC

    Presentation [pdf | ppt]

    The presentation used statistics derived from the APNIC Whois Database to provide a breakdown of IPv6 assignment registration throughout the region. The presenter remarked that the relatively low number of /48 assignments visible in the database suggests that many LIRs are not properly registering their assignments. He urged all LIRs to register their assignments in accordance with APNIC policy.

    Questions and discussion

    • None.

    Action items

    • None.

    Top

  5. Guidelines for ISPs on IPv6 assignment to customers

  6. Jordi Palet, Consulintel

    Presentation [pdf]

    This presentation was intended to introduce a document developed in Europe to create guidelines for IPv6 assignments. The presenter noted that providing a /48 to every subscriber does not represent a waste of address space. The recommended assignment sizes in the document are: /47 for very large subscribers; /48 as the general assignment size; /64 when it is known that only subnet will be needed; and /128 when it is absolutely known that only one device will need to be connected. One of the main reasons for recommending larger allocations is to protect the routing tables.

    Questions and discussion

    • The Chair noted that this is the IPv6 Technical SIG and asked whether there was any intention to present this in the Policy SIG. The presenter noted that there is no intention to change the policy, but rather to create a simple guide for people to apply the existing policies.
    • There was a question as to whether there were any discussions in the IETF for assignments between /128 and /64. It was noted that there are no discussions at this stage. This arose in the context of 3G phone networks. It was noted that the IETF is not going to attempt to specify policy, but there does need to be a recognition that what appears to be a single device, may sometimes be a router with a network behind it.

    Action items

    • None.

    Top

  7. An update on operational recommendations for IPv6 for TLDs and other servers

  8. Bill Manning, USC/ISI

    Presentation [pdf]

    This presentation reviewed existing transition mechanisms and examined recommendations for successful deployment of IPv6. The presenter noted that the number of existing DNS mechanisms available can make transition complex. He argued that DNS is the primary application and that all other services should be subordinate to DNS in planning the transition.

    The presenter noted the work of Akira Kato and WIDE on the IPv6 impact at the resolver. He then discussed the transition experiences of several early adopters of native IPv6 deployment.

    There was a discussion of the work that was done before adding IPv6 glue into the root zone. The presenter discussed the ARIN transition in detail. It was noted that the US Department of Commerce called on ICANN to develop a full blown technical proposal for IPv6 deployment that would guarantee smooth and stable service.

    The presenter noted that even if operating systems are up to date, it may be necessary to update every application to IPv6.

    Finally, the presenter noted that for the roots and the TLDs, IPv6 looks to be imminent and the question will be pushing it down.

    Questions and discussion

    • An ICANN representative confirmed the details of the ICANN transition work that were presented, noting that the backlog of TLD requests to add IPv6 is now being processed.

    Action items

    • None.

    Top

  9. IPv6 DNS server deployment in Korea

  10. Billy MH Cheon, KRNIC

    Presentation [pdf | ppt]

    This presentation described the background and progress of the project to deploy IPv6 DNS services in Korea. The presenter noted that Korea is now in stage two of a six stage timeline to develop full IPv6 services. He noted that Korea and Japan had their IPv6 glue records added to the root by ICANN in July 2004.

    The strategy in Korea was based on two goals: to provide stable IPv6 DNS services and to share technology and information. After deployment, a trial service will be commenced and there will be sharing of DNS operational technologies and information.

    The presenter discussed KRDNSv6, which is the trial IPv6 DNS service, which was established in 2004. He discussed its aims, structure, and operations.

    Questions and discussion

    • It was noted that the KRDNSv6 web site is currently available in Korean only, but is expected to be translated into English in 2005.

    Action items

    • None.

    Top

  11. Update on multihoming activity in the IETF

  12. Presentation [pdf | ppt]

    Geoff Huston, APNIC

    This was a report on current activities in the IETF to provide solutions that would allow multihoming in IPv6 without overloading the routing system. RFC3582 attempts to enumerate the goals but provides no solutions. The presenter reviewed several proposed approaches to creating a new protocol element. Other proposed approaches involve modifying existing stacks, or modifying the IP layer. The presenter suggested that the most viable place to deal with the problem is just above routing but below IP fragmentation. The presenter noted that issues involved in changing the architecture of IPv6 are fundamental and complex. Finally, the presenter suggested that multihoming should be considered a routing problem rather than an addressing one, in which case the direction of the proposed solutions may be headed in the wrong direction.

    Questions and discussion

    • None.

    Action items

    • None.

    Top

  13. Deployment plans behind larger IPv6 allocations

  14. Presentation [pdf]

    Jordi Palet, Consulintel

    This presentation was prepared in response to several operators asking for allocations greater than /32. The presenter sought inputs from these large operators to find out more about their rationale. The presenter provided a detailed summary of responses from various large operators to specific questions about how they intend to deploy their IPv6 network.

    Questions and discussion

    • None.

    Action items

    • None.

Meeting closed: 12:55 pm

Minuted by: Gerard Ross

Top

Open action items

  • None.

Minutes | IPv6 technical SIG


Top of page
Programme | SIGs | HM consultation | Social events | Sponsorship | APNIC meetings | APNIC 18 home | APNIC home
Last modified: Monday, 14-Mar-2016 10:52:32 EST | © 1999 - 2021 APNIC Pty. Ltd.
Contact us | Privacy statement