<< Back

No. 144 IPv4 markets and legacy space

German Valdez
NRO

Workshop

Theme

Enhanced Cooperation

Regardless of the advent of IPv4 transfers, and the possible emergence of an IPv4 market, the future growth and success of the Internet relies on the successful deployment of IPv6. IPv6 provides the only means to achieve long-term and scalable growth of the Internet while maintaining its critical technical features.

This workshop will focus on the importance of IPv6 deployment, in particular, its relationship with the possible emergence of an IPv4 market and the successful and proper implementation of inter-regional IPv4 transfer policies. It will also address issues related to legacy space. 

Currently two Regional Internet Registries (RIRs) allow transfers between their regions. APNIC and ARIN have worked with their communities to successfully implement IPv4 transfer policies following agreed procedures. Other regions have similar policies underway. The workshop will consider what aspects will enable balance, consistency, and fairness to define multiregional transfer policies.

Legacy IPv4 address space refers to those allocations made before the creation of the RIRs. This accounts for about 35% of total IPv4 space. What could be the actions of the RIR on this space and the cost benefit of engaging in a continuous recovering effort. 

For many Internet stakeholders, the RIRs are entering into a new era where high-level principle documents like RFC2050 need to be reviewed or updated.  What requires examination, in particular, are the possible effects of IPv4 address exhaustion on current RIR services and policies. For example, what actions the community should take in order to mitigate the effect of IPv4 address exhaustion, while simultaneously incentivizing global IPv6 deployment. Requiring consideration are the roles government, Internet operators, academia and other Internet organization should play.

The workshop will attempt to address the points outlined above through the opinions and views of a multi-disciplinary panel.

The Following Proposals have been merged with this one.

240     RFC2050 and the future of Internet resource allocation

256     Interregional harmonization of resource need justification


Has the proponent organised a workshop with a similar subject during past IGF meetings?

Yes

Indication of how the workshop will build on but go beyond the outcomes previously reached

The possible emergence of IPv4 markets, transfers, legacy space, and IPv6 deployment are ongoing issues that have raised a lot of stakeholder interest, especially the public sector. These topics have been raised in the context of preparations for the ITU World Telecommunication Policy Forum (WTPF) 2013 and also mentioned in the last World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly in 2012 in Dubai. These are current topics that are under review and debate in governmental forums that deserve further discussion in an open, inclusive, and forthright environment.

Background Paper

No background paper provided

Session Type

Panel

Organisation

Co-organisers

Mr. German Valdez, Number Resource Organisation, Technical Community, AUSTRALIA, Asia-Pacific Group

Have the Proponent or any of the co-organisers organised an IGF workshop before?

Yes

The link(s) to the workshop report(s)

http://wsms1.intgovforum.org/content/no99-moving-ipv6-challenges-internet-governance#report

http://wsms1.intgovforum.org/content/no100-internet-governance-and-rpki#report

http://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/IGF2011-understanding-workshop-report.pdf

http://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/IGF2011-IPv6-workshop-report.pdf

Panellists and Moderator

Invited panellists, individuals and organisations

= panellist or organisation has been confirmed

Please click on Biography to view the biography of panelllist

Arturo Servin, LACNIC, Male, Technical Community, MEXICO, Latin American and Caribbean Group - GRULACBiography

Izumi Okutani, JPNIC, Female, Technical Community, JAPAN, Asia-Pacific GroupBiography

Barry Green, PT Smartfren Telecom, Male, Private Sector, INDONESIA, Asia-Pacific Group

Musab Abdulla, Telecommunication Regulatory Agency - Bahrain, Male, Government, BAHRAIN, Asia-Pacific Group

David Conrad, Virtualized, LLC., Male, Private Sector, UNITED STATES, Western Europe and Others Group - WEOGBiography

Anne Rachel Inne, AFRINIC, Female, Technical Community, MAURITIUS, African GroupBiography

Nick Hilliard, INEX, Male, Technical Community, IRELAND, Western Europe and Others Group - WEOGBiography

Martin Levy, Hurricane Electric, Male, Private Sector, UNITED STATES, Western Europe and Others Group - WEOGBiography

Moderator

Martin Levy

Remote Moderator

German Valdez

Agenda

No information provided here

Inclusiveness of the Session

Assuming the allocation time will be 90 mins with a panel format this would be the distribution time.


1.- 5 Mins introduction by the moderator
2.- 10 mins slot for each speaker (6 to be in the panel)
3.- 20 mins open floor. Including remote participants.
4.- 5 Mins summary/conclusion by the moderator.

Suitability for Remote Participation

Depending on the Internet capacity in the venue the NRO is planning to make use of remote participation tools to allow remote participants.  RIR technical staff have broad experience in deploying remote participation tools like Webex or Adobe Connect where remote participants can follow the onsite discussion by video and/or audio. Special windows can display slides if need it. Questions or general comments can come through a special window chat.


Nowadays all RIR have a social media program where global promotion and discussion during the IGF could be encouraged. 

In the past some RIR have organised remote hubs i.e Bangladesh and Vanuatu. This could be included in the remote participation plan for this year.
 

Questions or Comments

The NRO is a coalition of the 5 Regional Internet Registry.  It's a global organisation so cannot be assigned to a particular region or group. I marked the Asia - Pacific group and Australia where I'm based but this doesn't fit in the organisation I represent.


The Following Proposals have been merged with this one.
240 RFC 2050 and the future of Internet resource allocation
256 Interregional Harmonization of Resource Need Justification

Tip: Please click each title to view the details.