[ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Reclamation Incentives

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf
Of
> Owen DeLong
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 11:45 AM
> To: William Herrin
> Cc: ARIN Address Policy
> Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal: Resource Reclamation Incentives
> 
> 
> On Jul 5, 2007, at 10:51 AM, William Herrin wrote:
> 
> > On 6/28/07, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> >> Here's an attempt to partially drain the swamp and create some
> >> incentives
> >> for legacy holders to both return available IPv4 space and start
> >> using
> >> IPv6.
> >
> > Owen,
> >
> > I don't object to your proposal but I question its value.
> >
> > I'm a legacy registrant with a /23 down in the swamp and until a
> > couple years ago I was the lead engineer for a registrant holding
two
> > legacy /18's. The policy offered by your proposal does not appeal to
> > me in either role.
> >
> OK... As the /23 holder, you're really not the target.
> 
> > As a /23 holder, why should I return the /23 or part of it (a /24)?
I
> > pay ARIN nothing now so a fee waiver is meaningless. A full fee
> waiver
> > for the initial assignment of an IPv6 block might be nice but I'd
> want
> > a more definite statement than "if you qualify" before both making
> the
> > effort to apply and turning in IPv4 addresses.
> >
> ARIN has no way to determine if you qualify for an IPv6 assignment
> before you apply for one.  However, when you applied, the only
> thing you would be obliged to is filling out the template and emailing
> it.  If you didn't qualify, it would end there unless you choose to
> pursue it further.  If you do qualify (either initially or after
> further
> effort), then, you would have the OPTION of taking an election under
> my policy to receive the IPv6 space for free (for 5 years) by bringing
> your IPv4 space (and ASN(s)) under RSA.

That's an interesting point.  It sounds to me as if the ultimate
depletion of IPv4 space is not going to be put off to any great degree
by reclaiming the old swamp space.  And, ARIN has guidelines for
acquiring new space based upon need/justification as defined by previous
allocations.  If it's true that reclamation is not going to help us to
any great degree, why not focus our efforts on writing language to allow
entities to use swamp space as justification for IPv6 allocations, but
not provide any particular incentives beyond that?  

As someone said on another list, (paraphrased) it's up to the entity to
decide their own routing policies.  If they want to continue to run
Token Ring/AppleTalk/IPv4 then that's their prerogative.  If they are
interested in running IPv6 then they should fall under the same
guidelines as everyone else who is allocated space from ARIN (or
whatever RIR they choose).  If ARIN wants to "be nice" and help those
entities get IPv6 space by allowing them to justify their allocation
using their swamp space then I'm in favor of it.  I'm not in favor of
any continuation of the ambiguities the swamp-holders enjoy/suffer.

Regards,

Michael K. Smith
mksmith at adhost.com (work)
mksmith at mac.com (!work)