APNIC IPv6 transit exchange

[Terry Manderson]

All,

Firstly let me clarify some areas.

The APNIC intention is to develop the understanding of IPv6 in the Asia 
Pacific. There are a few (very few) islands of IPv6 expertise and 
understanding in the region but considering that the AP region is a 
growing entity there is still much to learn for our region - in some 
ways the region missed out on the necessary lessons provided by 6Bone.

I'm sure you fully comprehend that the best way of learning is by doing.

This is not an effort to dredge up the past, it is however a necessary 
step to allow operators in developing regions to put their toe in the 
IPv6 pool. Especially if those regions have carriers (monopolistic or 
otherwise) that currently do not offer native v6 services.

In some ways, yes, Europe is well advanced in the IPv6 arena.

I'm not going to comment on what drives an IPv6 business case as I 
don't think I'm qualified, suffice to say that of the thousands of ISPs 
in the region I can count the number of those willing and capable to 
provide upstream ipv6  (tunneled or otherwise) on one hand. An 
unfortunate state really.
When ever I go to a conference and question people about IPv6 as to 
their development - the common and frequent response I get is "why 
bother, I can't get v6 transit easily".

Cheers
Terry


On 30/11/2007, at 11:24 AM, Bernhard Schmidt wrote:

> Jeroen Massar wrote:
>
>> This looks a bit like APNIC is going back to the 6bone days.
>> Odd, I always got the impression that IPv6 was doing fine in that
>> area.... clearly I was wrong and Europe is definitely in the lead.
>> I am also really wondering how several IPv6 transits, and in this case
>> especially the good folks from NTT are liking this.
>
> Yes, those are really bad news. Let's just hope it is a big 
> misunderstanding, but I don't feel like it is. I don't know what the 
> intent of some APNIC ideas regarding IPv6 is. First they split up 
> their /32 to several /35s announced in various locations (without 
> covering /32 aggregate) creating havoc for everyone filtering on RIR 
> allocation size (yes, 2001:dc0::/32 was allocated _way_ after the 
> minimum changed from /35 to /32), and now they want to create a 6bone 
> style tunnel+tableswap mess again?
>
> If done correctly, they would get decent upstream (say NTT) and 
> provide free downstream tunnels to their members. Still not the 
> brightest idea in the long run, as the only way to create a business 
> case for carriers is demand from their downstreams for (native) 
> connectivity, but at least it would not fuck up global routing again. 
> I just can't wait to see Europe-APNIC-"IX"-APNIC-Europe paths.
>
> I suggest downpreffing/blackholing AS38610 everywhere possible and 
> complaining hell to everyone at APNIC you can get a hold on.
>
> Regards,
> Bernhard
>
--
Terry Manderson                         email:      terry at apnic.net
Network Operations Manager, APNIC       sip:    info at voip.apnic.net
http://www.apnic.net                    phone:      +61 7 3858 3100