[Bp_ipv6] Usage of IPv6 by UN

Marco Hogewoning marcoh at ripe.net
Fri Jun 28 04:36:06 EDT 2019

Hey Willy, all,

My guess would be that UN also has some purchasing procedure/department, which would tender for services like IT and connectivity, so that would probably be a starting point.

- Is there a list of requirements and/or preferred suppliers
- Is there a procedure to add IPv6 to the list
- Who is behind the current arrangements and would they be able to change under existing contract?

From the outside it might appear trivial, but no doubt you have to a coordinated arrangement between a number of suppliers to ensure that IPv6 not only appears to be there, but really becomes usable for the end-users.

Also keep in mind that, for the topic at hand being IGF, connectivity is usually left to the host country. In some cases we have been successful in arranging IPv6 connectivity at venue either before or during the event, in other cases it turned out too much work.

If you look at UN in general, as above, rememberer it is a big piece of machinery. I’m now looking at the Geneva compound, which has its own ASN which appears to be managed by a UN Agency in Italy. It is a bit of a dig, but eventually from whois records it seems that they have a /29 IPv6 space assigned since 2014, which unfortunately was never seen in the global routing table.

Of course would encourage the UN to (finally) embrace IPv6 and get ready to have it offered on all services and at all UN premises, but it might be hard to find a single point on where to start, apart from maybe convincing the SecGen to make this a priority.

As for the European part of the organisation, if you manager to identify who might be able to get things in moving, we are happy to talk to them and see what we as RIPE NCC could do to help them. From the looks of it, they are a member, which means they have access to all our IPv6 resources such as trainings and should also have been on the receiving end of several awareness campaigns we have done towards our membership.

The mere fact that they did request an IPv6 allocation at least indicates there is some awareness about it, but probably as with many other big organisations it is not a big priority. Which was something we tried to capture in the 2nd run of the BPF process, but sadly did not find the magic solution to this problem.


Marco Hogewoning
External Relations, RIPE NCC

> On 28 Jun 2019, at 06:50, Willy Manga <mangawilly at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Luis and All,
> good morning.
> Just a quick follow-up on IPv6 deployment within UN ... I may be wrong
> but I see AS22723 is not even announcing any IPv6 prefixes.
> Who need to be convinced please ?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/bp_ipv6_intgovforum.org/attachments/20190628/6f2fd6ee/attachment.html>

More information about the Bp_ipv6 mailing list