[address-policy-wg] Fwd: Re: [AA] Aanvraag IPv6 adressen

Hi Aad,

On Aug 12, 2005, at 11:52 am, Aad van der Zanden wrote:

> Dear Sir/Madam
>
> IPv6 is one of the key research areas within NC3A and we have come  
> across an issue on addressing. I have presented  my questions to  
> SURFnet ( which you can find below )
> Since Surfnet has not yet presented their views yet I continued my  
> search. I came acros the ECP IPv6 portal and a presentation by Rumy  
> Kanis from RIPE NCC.
> http://www.ecp.nl/ipv6/docs/Rumy_Kanis_27apr05#1 which refers to  
> IPv6 plicy and this seems relevant to our problem.
> I am wondering if you can lead me to the right channel for some  
> more guidance on the issue of global IPv6 addres assignments for  
> large geographical distributed
> organisations like NATO ,

The global-v6 at lists.apnic.net may be the most appropriate forum for a  
discussion like this one.

The archives are here:

http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/global-v6/index.shtml

and you can subscribe from this page:

http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/global-v6

> We are also curious in which database tools are used by RIRs ?

Are you referring to the Whois databases themselves, or something else?

Kind regards,

-- 
leo vegoda
Registration Services Manager
RIPE NCC



>> Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2005 09:34:43 +0200
>> To: Jasper Distelbrink <jasper.distelbrink at surfnet.nl>,Rogier  
>> Spoor <rogier.spoor at surfnet.nl>
>> From: Aad van der Zanden <Aad.van.der.Zanden at nc3a.nato.int>
>> Subject: Re: [AA] Aanvraag IPv6 adressen
>> Cc: selm,jan- 
>> willem.smaal at nc3a.nato.int,levente.janovszki at nc3a.nato.int,goode,mart 
>> in.gerritsen at nc3a.nato.int
>>
>>
>> Dear Jasper /Rogier
>>
>> In March '05 our first official IPv6 block has been assigned to  
>> us; 2001:0610:0B20::/48. As it turns out, the policy is that even  
>> any home user gets a /48 assigned as a minimum. One starts  
>> wondering whether a /48 is then a proper size if one is allocating  
>> v6 addresses to an organisation that has currently approx 500  
>> people as well as numerous pilot networks spread over several  
>> locations.
>>
>> So after a review on the IPv6 address assignment ( and tryiing to  
>> sqeeuze all in the /48 ) we have come across a much broader view  
>> on assignment of IPv6 address space. Our Agency takes part or  
>> iniitated numerous networking initiatives that are ( or becoming )  
>> pilots to larger scale implementations. These network can have  
>> external connectivity ( sometimes exceeding international borders  
>> as well). Next to this these network may have several security  
>> classifications levels/layers.
>>
>> As an example:
>> We have a network called NGCS. It now simulates only 5-7  
>> Headquarter locations; the network is built upon two or more  
>> security levels/layers. So every "Headquarter" has at least these  
>> layers.
>>         - An "open layer" that is still a closed IP environment  
>> but may be using the internet as bearer one day - still it needs  
>> IPv6 capability now
>>         - a closed encrypted ( by means of IP crypto ) layer of  
>> networks - still it requires IPv6 capability now
>>         - some closed usergroups built on top by means of  
>> firewalls - also requires IPv6 capability to be studied
>> This pilot network is the first phase to the generic NATO IPv4/ 
>> IPv6 provisioning network so will scale to be a very large network  
>> in the end.
>>
>> How should we approach the IPv6 address assignment for this  
>> network in your view?
>> Could we currently apply for a larger IPv6 address space for the  
>> pilot for the open layer too from SURFnet? And what about the  
>> closed IP layer in the pilot?
>> What if the deployment becomes a fact - who will provide the NATO  
>> IPv6 addresses if some of those Headquarters are not directly ISP  
>> connected
>> Who is going to provide the closed layer IPv6 addresses? Since  
>> there is no private IPv6 address space, where should this address  
>> block come from ? ( so in the early pilot stage and in the  
>> "operational" stage?)
>>
>> Other networks exist which are built upon (NC3A private )  
>> infrastructure which crosses international borders to regional  
>> offices. So if we plan to deploy IPv6 on these networks too. How  
>> do we go about implementing IPv6 addressing here?
>>
>> It would help if you could outline the SURFnet approach to these  
>> interesting issues.
>> For now - can we apply for more IPv6 address space ( or a larger  
>> block ) to cover all these pilot networks ?
>>
>> Regards
>>  Aad
>