From owner-nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net Tue Nov 2 16:26:58 1999 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by ns.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA76691; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 16:26:48 +1000 (EST) Received: from pluto.syce.net (pluto.syce.net [202.241.3.137]) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA76663 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 16:26:31 +1000 (EST) Received: from localhost (erika.syce.net [202.241.3.251]) by pluto.syce.net (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7Wpl2-98122409) with ESMTP id PAA22176 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 15:09:55 +0900 (JST) To: nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net Subject: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. X-Mailer: Mew version 1.93 on Emacs 19.34 / Mule 2.3 (SUETSUMUHANA) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19991102152335D.fujisaki@syce.net> Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 15:23:35 +0900 From: (Tomohiro -INSTALLER- =?ISO-2022-JP?B?RnVqaXNha2kv?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCRiM6ahsoQiAbJEJDUjkoGyhC?=) X-Dispatcher: imput version 980905(IM100) Lines: 37 Sender: owner-nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net Precedence: bulk Hello Everyone. We JPNIC have been discussing NIR level IPv6 registration service. Bellow, I attached our service plan for IPv6 sub-TLA allocation. Please give advices for our plan. JPNIC IPv6 allocation service plan: - Application: JPNIC will prepare web pages on JPNIC's web machine, and accept application from JPNIC members (we'll ask you let us use APNIC's web system for IPv6 application as an example). After confirmation of membership, JPNIC will forward the application to APNIC. If more transaction need between APNIC and sub-TLA requester, JPNIC relay the transaction(forward mails between APNIC and requester. At the beginning, JPNIC will not participate in the transaction. We'll discuss further service such as consulting for the requester or translating the transaction in the near future). - Account: JPNIC will collect allocation fee from the sub-TLA requester (JPNIC member) and pay to APNIC after the sub-TLA address block allocated. Initial allocation fee to APNIC will be about $250 for /35 as you proposed. - Transition: If JPNIC members want to get sub-TLA before the service begin, ask them to wait the service or to become APNIC member. JPNIC have a plan to start the service at the beginning of December. Yours sincerely, -- Tomohiro Fujisaki From owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Wed Nov 3 11:43:41 1999 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by ns.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA102382; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:43:40 +1000 (EST) Received: from int-gw.staff.apnic.net (guardian.apnic.net [203.37.255.100]) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA102375 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:43:39 +1000 (EST) Received: (from mail@localhost) by int-gw.staff.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA06308; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:43:34 +1000 (EST) Received: from hadrian.staff.apnic.net(192.168.1.1) by int-gw.staff.apnic.net via smap (V2.1) id xma006306; Wed, 3 Nov 99 11:43:16 +1000 Received: from localhost (anne@localhost) by hadrian.staff.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA08945; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:43:14 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:43:14 +1000 (EST) From: Anne Lord X-Sender: anne@hadrian To: fujisaki@syce.net cc: nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net Subject: Re: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. In-Reply-To: <19991102152335D.fujisaki@syce.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Precedence: bulk Dear Fujisaki-San, Many thanks for your comments to this list. > We JPNIC have been discussing NIR level IPv6 registration service. > Bellow, I attached our service plan for IPv6 sub-TLA allocation. > > Please give advices for our plan. > > JPNIC IPv6 allocation service plan: > > - Application: > JPNIC will prepare web pages on JPNIC's web machine, and accept > application from JPNIC members (we'll ask you let us use APNIC's web > system for IPv6 application as an example). After confirmation of Yes, this would be fine. > membership, JPNIC will forward the application to APNIC. If more > transaction need between APNIC and sub-TLA requester, JPNIC relay the > transaction(forward mails between APNIC and requester. At the > beginning, JPNIC will not participate in the transaction. We'll Here are my thoughts for JPNIC to consider. APNIC has a relationship with JPNIC, and JPNIC has a relationship with it's members. APNIC does not have a relationship with JPNIC members. We need to ensure that JPNIC maintains the strength of its relationship with its members. Therefore I feel to make the request process as smooth as possible JPNIC should participate in the transaction. So APNIC will ask JPNIC questions about the request, and JPNIC will ask its member. Does this seem reasonable? I'm not suggesting a big change to what you suggest - I just want to make it clear that I think it is important you ask your members these questions, so that you can keep the strong relationship you have with them. > discuss further service such as consulting for the requester or > translating the transaction in the near future). Okay. > - Account: > JPNIC will collect allocation fee from the sub-TLA requester (JPNIC > member) and pay to APNIC after the sub-TLA address block > allocated. Initial allocation fee to APNIC will be about $250 for /35 > as you proposed. Well APNIC will bill JPNIC directly under the appropriate confederation fees. The amount above is correct for JPNIC. How you charge your members is outside this discussion. > - Transition: > If JPNIC members want to get sub-TLA before the service begin, > ask them to wait the service or to become APNIC member. I'm not sure I undertand - can't they request the address space through JPNIC as you have described above? > JPNIC have a plan to start the service at the beginning of December. Great! Do other NIR's have comments? Anne Manager, Member Services From owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Fri Nov 19 22:55:52 1999 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA100057; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 22:55:51 +1000 (EST) Received: from pluto.syce.net (pluto.syce.net [202.241.3.137]) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA99867 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 22:54:27 +1000 (EST) Received: from localhost (erika.syce.net [202.241.3.251]) by pluto.syce.net (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7Wpl2-98122409) with ESMTP id VAA09503 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 21:38:48 +0900 (JST) To: nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net Subject: Re: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. X-Mailer: Mew version 1.93 on Emacs 19.34 / Mule 2.3 (SUETSUMUHANA) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19991119215207V.fujisaki@syce.net> Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 21:52:07 +0900 From: (Tomohiro -INSTALLER- =?ISO-2022-JP?B?RnVqaXNha2kv?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCRiM6ahsoQiAbJEJDUjkoGyhC?=) X-Dispatcher: imput version 980905(IM100) Lines: 44 Sender: owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Precedence: bulk Anne, thank you for your reply. | > membership, JPNIC will forward the application to APNIC. If more | > transaction need between APNIC and sub-TLA requester, JPNIC relay the | > transaction(forward mails between APNIC and requester. At the | > beginning, JPNIC will not participate in the transaction. We'll | | Here are my thoughts for JPNIC to consider. APNIC has a relationship | with JPNIC, and JPNIC has a relationship with it's members. APNIC does | not have a relationship with JPNIC members. We need to ensure that | JPNIC maintains the strength of its relationship with its members. | Therefore I feel to make the request process as smooth as possible | JPNIC should participate in the transaction. So APNIC will ask | JPNIC questions about the request, and JPNIC will ask its member. | | Does this seem reasonable? I'm not suggesting a big change to what | you suggest - I just want to make it clear that I think it is | important you ask your members these questions, so that you can | keep the strong relationship you have with them. At the beginning, we think it is difficult to do such things because of translation problem, lack of experience at JPNIC, and so on. Of cause, we JPNIC have intention to do as you proposed in the future. If JPNIC members ask any questions to us, we'll answer to them. Could you please tell us how APNIC think about the APNIC DB? 1. How long prefixes does APNIC expect to be registered ? Should sub-TLA holders register SLA level(/48) networks to the APNIC DB? 2. We heard that APNIC expects us having responsibility to register the APNIC DB for sub-TLA holders under JPNIC. We think it is difficult because in the IPv6 case at the beginning, we do not have any authority for IPv6 address and do not maintain a public database for IPv6 addresses. To encourage sub-TLA holders to maintain their data, we think both carrots and sticks, such as auto-registration of reverse lookup coincident with the maintenance of APNIC DB, are necessary. Yours sincerely, -- Tomohiro Fujisaki From owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Fri Nov 19 23:01:21 1999 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA100057; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 22:55:51 +1000 (EST) Received: from pluto.syce.net (pluto.syce.net [202.241.3.137]) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA99867 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 22:54:27 +1000 (EST) Received: from localhost (erika.syce.net [202.241.3.251]) by pluto.syce.net (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7Wpl2-98122409) with ESMTP id VAA09503 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 1999 21:38:48 +0900 (JST) To: nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net Subject: Re: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. X-Mailer: Mew version 1.93 on Emacs 19.34 / Mule 2.3 (SUETSUMUHANA) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19991119215207V.fujisaki@syce.net> Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1999 21:52:07 +0900 From: (Tomohiro -INSTALLER- =?ISO-2022-JP?B?RnVqaXNha2kv?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCRiM6ahsoQiAbJEJDUjkoGyhC?=) X-Dispatcher: imput version 980905(IM100) Lines: 44 Sender: owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Precedence: bulk Anne, thank you for your reply. | > membership, JPNIC will forward the application to APNIC. If more | > transaction need between APNIC and sub-TLA requester, JPNIC relay the | > transaction(forward mails between APNIC and requester. At the | > beginning, JPNIC will not participate in the transaction. We'll | | Here are my thoughts for JPNIC to consider. APNIC has a relationship | with JPNIC, and JPNIC has a relationship with it's members. APNIC does | not have a relationship with JPNIC members. We need to ensure that | JPNIC maintains the strength of its relationship with its members. | Therefore I feel to make the request process as smooth as possible | JPNIC should participate in the transaction. So APNIC will ask | JPNIC questions about the request, and JPNIC will ask its member. | | Does this seem reasonable? I'm not suggesting a big change to what | you suggest - I just want to make it clear that I think it is | important you ask your members these questions, so that you can | keep the strong relationship you have with them. At the beginning, we think it is difficult to do such things because of translation problem, lack of experience at JPNIC, and so on. Of cause, we JPNIC have intention to do as you proposed in the future. If JPNIC members ask any questions to us, we'll answer to them. Could you please tell us how APNIC think about the APNIC DB? 1. How long prefixes does APNIC expect to be registered ? Should sub-TLA holders register SLA level(/48) networks to the APNIC DB? 2. We heard that APNIC expects us having responsibility to register the APNIC DB for sub-TLA holders under JPNIC. We think it is difficult because in the IPv6 case at the beginning, we do not have any authority for IPv6 address and do not maintain a public database for IPv6 addresses. To encourage sub-TLA holders to maintain their data, we think both carrots and sticks, such as auto-registration of reverse lookup coincident with the maintenance of APNIC DB, are necessary. Yours sincerely, -- Tomohiro Fujisaki From owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Mon Nov 22 14:39:23 1999 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA83217; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 14:39:22 +1000 (EST) Received: from guardian.apnic.net (guardian.apnic.net [203.37.255.100]) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA83213 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 14:39:21 +1000 (EST) Received: (from mail@localhost) by guardian.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA13323; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 14:39:13 +1000 (EST) Received: from hadrian.staff.apnic.net(192.168.1.1) by int-gw.staff.apnic.net via smap (V2.1) id xma013319; Mon, 22 Nov 99 14:38:45 +1000 Received: from localhost (anne@localhost) by hadrian.staff.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id OAA02446; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 14:38:44 +1000 (EST) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 14:38:44 +1000 (EST) From: Anne Lord X-Sender: anne@hadrian To: fujisaki@syce.net cc: nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net Subject: Re: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. In-Reply-To: <19991119215207V.fujisaki@syce.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Precedence: bulk Tomohiro-San, [snip] > | Here are my thoughts for JPNIC to consider. APNIC has a relationship > | with JPNIC, and JPNIC has a relationship with it's members. APNIC does > | not have a relationship with JPNIC members. We need to ensure that > | JPNIC maintains the strength of its relationship with its members. > | Therefore I feel to make the request process as smooth as possible > | JPNIC should participate in the transaction. So APNIC will ask > | JPNIC questions about the request, and JPNIC will ask its member. > | > | Does this seem reasonable? I'm not suggesting a big change to what > | you suggest - I just want to make it clear that I think it is > | important you ask your members these questions, so that you can > | keep the strong relationship you have with them. > > At the beginning, we think it is difficult to do such things because > of translation problem, lack of experience at JPNIC, and so on. Of > cause, we JPNIC have intention to do as you proposed in the future. > If JPNIC members ask any questions to us, we'll answer to them. I think essentially we agree here. > Could you please tell us how APNIC think about the APNIC DB? > > 1. > How long prefixes does APNIC expect to be registered ? Should sub-TLA > holders register SLA level(/48) networks to the APNIC DB? > Yes. As a /48 is the minimum that would be assigned to a "site" this is the smallest prefix we would expect to see registered. > 2. > We heard that APNIC expects us having responsibility to register the > APNIC DB for sub-TLA holders under JPNIC. We think it is difficult > because in the IPv6 case at the beginning, we do not have any > authority for IPv6 address and do not maintain a public database for > IPv6 addresses. To encourage sub-TLA holders to maintain their data, > we think both carrots and sticks, such as auto-registration of reverse > lookup coincident with the maintenance of APNIC DB, are necessary. I'm not sure what you are saying here, so forgive me if I misunderstand. Let's see.. JPNIC, as an NIR is the custodian of all address space allocations in Japan. Registration is a fundamental and crucial part of the responsibilities of an LIR, NIR and RIR. The requirement is that the LIR registers their IPv6 assignments. The NIR has the delegated responsibility for its members to ensure that the data is being registered, in just the same way as with IPv4. Did I misunderstand what you meant? regards, Anne Manager, Member Services From owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Mon Nov 22 17:15:58 1999 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA95916; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 17:15:57 +1000 (EST) Received: from mgo.iij.ad.jp (mgo.iij.ad.jp [202.232.15.6]) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA95908 for ; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 17:15:53 +1000 (EST) Received: from ns.iij.ad.jp (root@ns.iij.ad.jp [192.168.2.8]) by mgo.iij.ad.jp (8.8.8/MGO1.0) with ESMTP id QAA06491; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:15:50 +0900 (JST) Received: from fs.iij.ad.jp (root@fs.iij.ad.jp [192.168.2.9]) by ns.iij.ad.jp (8.8.5/3.5Wpl7) with ESMTP id QAA02373; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:15:50 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (mine.iij.ad.jp [192.168.10.205]) by fs.iij.ad.jp (8.8.5/3.5Wpl7) with ESMTP id QAA28803; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:15:49 +0900 (JST) To: ip-v6@nic.ad.jp, nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net Subject: Re: [JPNIC ip-v6 100] Re: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. From: Kazu Yamamoto (=?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCOzNLXE9CSScbKEI=?=) In-Reply-To: References: <19991119215207V.fujisaki@syce.net> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.95b5 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.0 (HANANOEN) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19991122161603J.kazu@iijlab.net> Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:16:03 +0900 X-Dispatcher: imput version 991025(IM133) Lines: 30 Sender: owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Precedence: bulk Anne, From: Anne Lord Subject: [JPNIC ip-v6 100] Re: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. > Let's see.. JPNIC, as an NIR is the custodian of all address space > allocations in Japan. Registration is a fundamental and crucial part > of the responsibilities of an LIR, NIR and RIR. The requirement is > that the LIR registers their IPv6 assignments. The NIR has the delegated > responsibility for its members to ensure that the data is being > registered, in just the same way as with IPv4. The case for IPv6 is not the same as that for IPv4. In the case for IPv4, APNIC allocates IPv4 address blocks and delegates the reverse lookup function to JPNIC, for example. So, an ISP in Japan requests an IPv4 address block to JPNIC then JPNIC assigns an block to the ISP. When ISP updates the JPNIC DB, it is JPNIC that sets up reverse lookup for the ISP's customer. This seems to work well since JPNIC handles both IPv4 address assignments and reverse lookup. However, in the case for IPv6, it is APNIC that allocates an IPv6 sTLA to an ISP in Japan. When the ISP sets up reverse lookup for customers by himself, how to ensure to make the ISP update the *APNIC* DB? In this case, who has responsibility to encourage ISPs to update the APNIC DB? --Kazu From owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Fri Nov 26 16:54:08 1999 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA105992; Fri, 26 Nov 1999 16:54:07 +1000 (EST) Received: from pluto.syce.net (pluto.syce.net [202.241.3.137]) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA105984 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 1999 16:54:00 +1000 (EST) Received: from localhost (erika.syce.net [202.241.3.251]) by pluto.syce.net (8.9.3+3.2W/3.7Wpl2-98122409) with ESMTP id PAA19259; Fri, 26 Nov 1999 15:39:05 +0900 (JST) To: nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net Cc: ip-v6@nic.ad.jp Subject: Re: [JPNIC ip-v6 101] Re: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:16:03 +0900" <19991122161603J.kazu@iijlab.net> References: <19991122161603J.kazu@iijlab.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mew version 1.93 on Emacs 19.34 / Mule 2.3 (SUETSUMUHANA) Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19991126155331H.fujisaki@syce.net> Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 15:53:31 +0900 From: (Tomohiro -INSTALLER- =?ISO-2022-JP?B?RnVqaXNha2kv?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCRiM6ahsoQiAbJEJDUjkoGyhC?=) X-Dispatcher: imput version 980905(IM100) Lines: 38 Sender: owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Precedence: bulk Anne, As Kazu-san said, at the moment it is difficult for us to take on responsibility for the data being registered. Of course we'll strongly guide our members the requirents written in RIR's policy draft line bellow. - sub-TLA holders must register assignment informaton to APNIC DB - Registered data will be used to verify the usage. It affect subsequent allocation and reclamation of addresses. | > let's see.. JPNIC, as an NIR is the custodian of all address space | > allocations in Japan. Registration is a fundamental and crucial part | > of the responsibilities of an LIR, NIR and RIR. The requirement is | > that the LIR registers their IPv6 assignments. The NIR has the delegated | > responsibility for its members to ensure that the data is being | > registered, in just the same way as with IPv4. | | The case for IPv6 is not the same as that for IPv4. | | In the case for IPv4, APNIC allocates IPv4 address blocks and | delegates the reverse lookup function to JPNIC, for example. So, an | ISP in Japan requests an IPv4 address block to JPNIC then JPNIC | assigns an block to the ISP. When ISP updates the JPNIC DB, it is | JPNIC that sets up reverse lookup for the ISP's customer. This seems | to work well since JPNIC handles both IPv4 address assignments and | reverse lookup. | | However, in the case for IPv6, it is APNIC that allocates an IPv6 sTLA | to an ISP in Japan. When the ISP sets up reverse lookup for customers | by himself, how to ensure to make the ISP update the *APNIC* DB? | | In this case, who has responsibility to encourage ISPs to update the | APNIC DB? Yours sincerely, -- Tomohiro Fujisaki From owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Tue Nov 30 15:52:40 1999 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA83665; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:52:39 +1000 (EST) Received: from svc00.apnic.net (svc00.apnic.net [202.12.28.131]) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA83655 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:52:33 +1000 (EST) Received: from guardian.apnic.net (guardian.apnic.net [203.37.255.100]) by svc00.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA08192 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 14:51:25 +0900 (JST) Received: (from mail@localhost) by guardian.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA20584; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:50:35 +1000 (EST) Received: from hadrian.staff.apnic.net(192.168.1.1) by int-gw.staff.apnic.net via smap (V2.1) id xma020578; Tue, 30 Nov 99 15:50:11 +1000 Received: from localhost (anne@localhost) by hadrian.staff.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA29225; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:50:09 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:50:08 +1000 (EST) From: Anne Lord X-Sender: anne@hadrian Reply-To: Anne Lord To: Kazu Yamamoto cc: ip-v6@nic.ad.jp, nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net Subject: Re: [JPNIC ip-v6 100] Re: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. In-Reply-To: <19991122161603J.kazu@iijlab.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Precedence: bulk Hello Kazu, > Anne, > > From: Anne Lord > Subject: [JPNIC ip-v6 100] Re: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. > > > Let's see.. JPNIC, as an NIR is the custodian of all address space > > allocations in Japan. Registration is a fundamental and crucial part > > of the responsibilities of an LIR, NIR and RIR. The requirement is > > that the LIR registers their IPv6 assignments. The NIR has the delegated > > responsibility for its members to ensure that the data is being > > registered, in just the same way as with IPv4. > > The case for IPv6 is not the same as that for IPv4. > > In the case for IPv4, APNIC allocates IPv4 address blocks and > delegates the reverse lookup function to JPNIC, for example. So, an > ISP in Japan requests an IPv4 address block to JPNIC then JPNIC > assigns an block to the ISP. When ISP updates the JPNIC DB, it is > JPNIC that sets up reverse lookup for the ISP's customer. This seems > to work well since JPNIC handles both IPv4 address assignments and > reverse lookup. > > However, in the case for IPv6, it is APNIC that allocates an IPv6 sTLA > to an ISP in Japan. When the ISP sets up reverse lookup for customers > by himself, how to ensure to make the ISP update the *APNIC* DB? > > In this case, who has responsibility to encourage ISPs to update the > APNIC DB? JPNIC. A procedural difference over where the reverse delegations are managed from - does not affect the larger principle of registration, which is a distributed responsibility through the hierarchy of the registry system from IANA-RIR-NIR-LIR. While an organisation obtains IPv6 address space through JPNIC and is JPNIC's member, JPNIC has that responsibility. It goes with the job. Does JPNIC have support for an IPv6 network object? If so, your members can register in the JPNIC database. This can then be mirrored as it is today. However, we may be talking at cross purposes. I am NOT saying that you must register the data yourselves on behalf of your customers. Anne -- From owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Tue Nov 30 15:52:47 1999 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA83683; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:52:47 +1000 (EST) Received: from guardian.apnic.net (guardian.apnic.net [203.37.255.100]) by whois.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA83678 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:52:45 +1000 (EST) Received: (from mail@localhost) by guardian.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA20613; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:52:05 +1000 (EST) Received: from hadrian.staff.apnic.net(192.168.1.1) by int-gw.staff.apnic.net via smap (V2.1) id xma020610; Tue, 30 Nov 99 15:51:45 +1000 Received: from localhost (anne@localhost) by hadrian.staff.apnic.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA29382; Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:51:43 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 15:51:43 +1000 (EST) From: Anne Lord X-Sender: anne@hadrian To: fujisaki@syce.net cc: nir-discuss@ns.apnic.net, ip-v6@nic.ad.jp Subject: Re: [JPNIC ip-v6 101] Re: IPv6 sub-TLA allocation service at NIR. In-Reply-To: <19991126155331H.fujisaki@syce.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-nir-discuss@lists.apnic.net Precedence: bulk Tomohiro, > As Kazu-san said, at the moment it is difficult for us to take on > responsibility for the data being registered. Of course we'll strongly > guide our members the requirents written in RIR's policy draft line > bellow. > - sub-TLA holders must register assignment informaton to APNIC DB > - Registered data will be used to verify the usage. It affect > subsequent allocation and reclamation of addresses. Yes, this is in fact what I mean. Anne -- > > | > let's see.. JPNIC, as an NIR is the custodian of all address space > | > allocations in Japan. Registration is a fundamental and crucial part > | > of the responsibilities of an LIR, NIR and RIR. The requirement is > | > that the LIR registers their IPv6 assignments. The NIR has the delegated > | > responsibility for its members to ensure that the data is being > | > registered, in just the same way as with IPv4. > | > | The case for IPv6 is not the same as that for IPv4. > | > | In the case for IPv4, APNIC allocates IPv4 address blocks and > | delegates the reverse lookup function to JPNIC, for example. So, an > | ISP in Japan requests an IPv4 address block to JPNIC then JPNIC > | assigns an block to the ISP. When ISP updates the JPNIC DB, it is > | JPNIC that sets up reverse lookup for the ISP's customer. This seems > | to work well since JPNIC handles both IPv4 address assignments and > | reverse lookup. > | > | However, in the case for IPv6, it is APNIC that allocates an IPv6 sTLA > | to an ISP in Japan. When the ISP sets up reverse lookup for customers > | by himself, how to ensure to make the ISP update the *APNIC* DB? > | > | In this case, who has responsibility to encourage ISPs to update the > | APNIC DB? > > Yours sincerely, > -- > Tomohiro Fujisaki >