[Chapter-delegates] Concerns about India's IPv6 Strategy.

Thu Jan 19 10:45:48 PST 2012

Dear Carlos Martinez,

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 3:11 AM, Carlos M. Martinez <
carlosmarcelomartinez at gmail.com> wrote:

> I followed the discussion on APNIC's Policy Mailing List, and the Indian
> officials defending the proposal demonstrated an extremely poor
> understanding of basic routing and BGP.
>

Agreed. +1 on your observations and that of Fred Baker. Wonder if there is
a nice way of reaching out to those within our Government and the ISPAI
with an offer to arrange a non-technical session on IPv6 fundamentals for
those who shape India's IPv6 policy.

>
> Whether they were misled by their lack of understanding of how the
> Internet works, or whether they have a hidden agenda, I couldn't say.
>

The lack of understanding does exist. But it is also true that this 'lack
of understanding' is quite convenient for those in Government who like the
idea of ABSOLUTE power over the way Internet in India functions.

Hidden Agenda ?  Yes. Part of it is visible in the form of what surfaces in
open discussions and inevitable announcements. There is a lot more
invisible.

>
> Is there any way we can help you SM ?
>

That is very kind of you. Please share your concerns with the most educated
among the LACNIC participants and possibly even reach out to afrinic, ripe
and arin who could reach out to APNIC and express their concerns for the
good of the Internet.

Thank you.
Sivasubramanian M

>
> regards
>
> Carlos
>
>
> On Jan 18, 2012, at 5:24 PM, Sivasubramanian M wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> As we move towards worldwide IPv6 launch, it becomes important to pay
> attention to some developments that threaten to drastically alter the way
> IPv6 resources will be deployed.
>
> India is pursuing a proposal - "it is not a proposal for India, it is a
> proposal from India" to seek allocation of contiguous IPv6 address block
> from APNIC countrywise. At APNIC, Busan, India proposed that large,
> contiguous blocks be allotted, country-wise, to all countries in the
> Region.
>
> In an unpublished letter to the editor of "The Hindu" I wrote and later
> posted in the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus List:
>
> It is difficult to see this as anything other than a move to control the
>> Internet by an anachronistic proposal to nationalize the allocation of
>> Internet address space. The idea of 'country-wide' and  'contiguous' allocation
>> together with the implied idea of 'All IPv6 addresses ONLY through the
>> National Internet Registry',  would result in the unintended(?) outcome of
>> reducing the Internet from being a free, open and universal medium to a
>> Government controlled communication platform defined by national
>> boundaries.
>
>
> ( In his response to the discussion in the IGC list, Paul Wilson confirmed
> that an Indian NIR is in formation and Nixi has received in-principle
> approval from APNIC. He clarified that the NIR does not have exclusivity
> within its country or economy and that NIXI has agreed to abide by this
> policy. He confirmed that the proposal for IPv6 allocations to individual
> countries is under discussion .
> http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-100 )
>
>>
>> It is likely that this is another proposal that is a reflection of wrong
>> inputs to the policy makers. The ISPs do not require any form of Government
>> help in the process of obtaining address blocks from the Regional Internet
>> Registry [a National Internet Registry is not really required]. They need
>> to be free, and continue with the status quo of uncomplicated processes in
>> obtaining address blocks. With the relatively unlimited IPv6 space, the RIR
>> processes could actually become a lot less complicated.
>
>
>> Static IPv4 addresses have been expensive for the end-user in India, hope
>> this will not be case with IPv6 address, on the present model of RIR - ISP
>> relationship, free of Government mediation. With continued freedom, could
>> we hope that the ISPs in India make it an automatic process for the
>> end-users to obtain static IPv6 user blocks for connecting their computers
>> and other devices, without bundling IP addresses with expensive bandwidth
>> subscription plans?
>
>
> (Earlier on India's proposal for theNational Internet Registry, I sent
> comments from Internet Society India Chennai on December 1, 2009 to the
> Executive Secretary of APNIC.
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apnic-talk/archive/2009/12/msg00001.html The
> PDF file as sent is attached)
>
> The transcripts of the Policy Discussion on the proposal 'from' India (for
> countrywise allocation of IPv6 addresses to every country) at the Busan
> Session is at page : http://meetings.apnic.net/32/program/policy/transcript#session
> 3
>
> Naveen Karaparambil Lakshman of our Chapter draws attention to the
> following comment during the session by Dmitri Burkov at the Busan Session.
>
> *Dmitri Burkov:* I have a lot of concerns about these proposals but I
>> don't want to repeat all the arguments against.  I want to point out only
>> one issue. I was really surprised at these ideas to use IP addresses for
>> the personal identifications of citizens. If you want to do this, I say
>> you don't need just /64 because you fill all the paper. First of all, I
>> think it's improper usage in the wrong direction.  Thank you.
>
>
> While we move closer to worldwide IPv6 Launch, these developments in the
> Asia Pacific Region requires attention. This proposal would come up again
> at APRICOT 2012 to be held during 21 February - March 2, in the Nixi turf,
> so there is a definite likelihood of a proposal like this voted in.
>
> I may not attend this meeting. I am posting this in the list for
> discussion on these concerns. If these concerns are valid, I would request
> community members to pay attention to the developments on this, and
> participate in the Delhi meeting in person or by Internet
>
> http://www.apricot2012.net/participation
>
>
> Sivasubramanian M
> ISOC India Chennai
> http://isocindiachennai.org
>
>
> facebook: goo.gl/1VvIG
> LinkedIn:  goo.gl/eUt7s
> Twitter: http://goo.gl/kaQ3a
> http://internetstudio.in/
>
> <Internet Society India Chennai comments on the application from NIxi to
> form a National Internet Registry in India.pdf>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20120120/69356a7e/attachment.htm>