Members of the Internet community gathered recently to examine ongoing discussion by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU), which is investigating a number of issues regarding IP address management including whether or not it should attempt to become involved in the global IP address allocation and management system.
As a result of these discussions, an agreed community statement was prepared and included in a report delivered directly to the ITU for consideration by its "IPv6 Group" when it meets today,15 March 2010 in Geneva.
The ITU, which will meet in October 2010 for its quadrennial meeting, established the IPv6 Group to explore perceived issues surrounding the allocation and management of IPv6 Internet addresses. On the agenda for the 15 March 2010 meeting is a discussion of the possible creation of a parallel structure to what is already in place—the Regional Internet Registry system—that will give its Member States the option of a Country Internet Registry.
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix itThe APNIC Community Consultation session, held in collaboration with the Number Resource Organization at APNIC 29 on 3 March 2010, concluded that a parallel address management system could create significant risks to the Internet, notably, fragmentation of the Internet itself. As such, the community called for a clear problem statement, sufficient details of proposed solutions, and a thorough risk analysis.
Brandenburg InternetWorking's Dave Crocker, a member of the North American Internet community, asked a question that was troubling others in attendance—what problem with the current system of IP address management does the ITU hope to address? "I’ve always understood that a precept in making changes to an operational system is to only make changes that are essential. I don’t think I understand what problem needs to be fixed?" said Crocker.
"The question is how can an ITU Member Country help? A parallel structure is not the answer," commented Judith Duavit Vazquez, PHCOLO founder. She is a member of the Philippine Internet community and believes there is nothing wrong with the existing structure of IP address management.
Transparent, bottom-up communicationA complete transcript and video of the session are available for public viewing on the APNIC website. It was apparent that most community members in attendance felt the inclusiveness of Internet governance is vital, and that sense of openness could be threatened if another system of governance is put in place alongside the RIR system.
The APNIC Internet community compiled a statement on behalf of the Asia Pacific community, the Number Resources Organization, and Internet users worldwide that was submitted to the ITU for consideration at the IPv6 Group meeting.
In essence members of the community called for the ITU to observe the example of the Internet community and the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) process and make its documents and records available publicly, so that all Internet stakeholders can participate in deliberations that could have global ramifications.
James Spenceley, a member of the governing board of APNIC (Asia Pacific Network Information Centre), summed up the benefits of how IP addresses are currently managed: "The Internet has become what it is today because of open, transparent, bottom-up processes. There are no barriers to participation, and addresses are equitably and effectively distributed throughout the world."
The APNIC Community Consultation was a defining moment in demonstrating a public view that there is no need to have an additional parallel structure to manage IPv6 addresses. The discussion process itself and well-established arguments to support the existing RIRs’ mechanism for IPv6 address management provided further proof of validity to the current Internet management processes.
APNIC
