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

Thu Jan 19 10:54:23 PST 2012

Dear Eric Burger,

On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Eric Burger <eburger at standardstrack.com>wrote:

> Has anyone pointed out that India might need more addresses than their
> contiguous allocation would offer them?

Thank you. That is a very good point. Our Government needs to consider this.

> I.e., is it worth doing an educational campaign in country to let the
> populace know their government want to limit economic growth and hold India
> back compared to other regions in the world by capping the number of
> internet addresses available to India?
>

It would indeed be worthwhile. But before we could raise this observation,
our Government might do something clever such as increase the quantum of
the address blocks requested, or introduce a note in its proposal to
indicate that it would apply for more, so reserve a "contiguous buffer" to
provide for India's future requests !

In general, our immediate limitation with respect to outreach is that we
are not so well connected to the press at the moment. In India, reaching
out to the press is not so easy as sending out an email message. I have
tried reaching NDTV and The Hindu at least, but so far I have not received
a response.

Thank you.
Sivasubramanian M

> On Jan 18, 2012, at 4:41 PM, Carlos M. Martinez 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.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > Is there any way we can help you SM ?
> >
> > 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 In an unpublished letter to the editor of "The Hindu" I wrote and later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.htmlThe 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20120120/9addd634/attachment.htm>