[ppml] Policy Proposal: End Policy for IANA IPv4 allocations to RIRs
Izumi Okutani
izumi at nic.ad.jp
Thu Sep 13 22:05:45 EDT 2007
- Previous message: [ppml] Policy Proposal: End Policy for IANA IPv4 allocations to RIRs
- Next message: [ppml] ARIN commments regarding Lame Delegation Policy
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
One more note. I wasn't clear about if this is a global policy or a regional ARIN policy - it is intended to be a global policy as it defines distribution of IANA blocks. izumi Izumi Okutani さんは書きました: > Thanks for your input Marla, and apologies for taking some time to reply. > > Just to clarify our intention, we think this will help reduce confusion > for distribution of the last few IANA blocks. > > For example, if ARIN was planning to request for 2*/8 next month, but > APNIC (or any other RIR) comes just before and IANA pool runs out as a > result, ARIN will be left with 0 additional block it was counting on. > This will also affect distribution of the last ARIN block within the > region as you don't know which would be the last block until the last > minute. > > By pre-defining what each RIR will receive in advance (with the size > which does not affect each RIR's exhaustion date), we think it helps > solve this issue and minimize confusion at the time of exhaustion. > > I see your point about section 2, so I'll remove it from my slides at > the meeting. thanks. I'd also be happy to remove section 3 if it's an > obvious fact which doesn't need to be shared. > > > izumi > > Azinger, Marla さんは書きました: >> Here are my two cents: >> >> -I don't support this. Let it run out. Write a policy figuring out what IANA does once contiguous requests cant be met. >> >> -Section 2 needs to be removed. It isn't policy and more a suggestion/guidance of things that RIR's should think about doing. >> -Section 3 needs to be removed. It isn't policy and more a staff requirement for RIR's. >> >> Cheers! >> Marla Azinger >> Frontier Communications >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of >> Member Services >> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 8:20 AM >> To: ppml at arin.net >> Subject: [ppml] Policy Proposal: End Policy for IANA IPv4 allocations to >> RIRs >> >> >> ARIN received the following policy proposal. In accordance with the ARIN >> Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, the proposal is being >> posted to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and being placed on >> ARIN's website. >> >> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review this proposal at their next >> regularly scheduled meeting. The AC may decide to: >> >> 1. Accept the proposal as a formal policy proposal as written. If the >> AC accepts the proposal, it will be posted as a formal policy proposal >> to PPML and it will be presented at a Public Policy Meeting. >> >> 2. Postpone their decision regarding the proposal until the next >> regularly scheduled AC meeting in order to work with the author. The AC >> will work with the author to clarify, combine or divide the proposal. At >> their following meeting the AC will accept or not accept the proposal. >> >> 3. Not accept the proposal. If the AC does not accept the proposal, >> the AC will explain their decision. If a proposal is not accepted, then >> the author may elect to use the petition process to advance their >> proposal. If the author elects not to petition or the petition fails, >> then the proposal will be closed. >> >> The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the >> names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML. >> >> In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on this proposal on >> the PPML, particularly their support or non-support and the reasoning >> behind their opinion. Such participation contributes to a thorough >> vetting and provides important guidance to the AC in their deliberations. >> >> The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at: >> http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html >> >> Mailing list subscription information can be found at: >> http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/ >> >> Regards, >> >> Member Services >> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) >> >> >> ## * ## >> >> >> Policy Proposal Name: End Policy for IANA IPv4 allocations to RIRs >> >> Author: JPNIC IPv4 countdown policy team; >> Akinori MAEMURA >> Akira NAKAGAWA >> Izumi OKUTANI >> Kosuke ITO >> Kuniaki KONDO >> Shuji NAKAMURA >> Susumu SATO >> Takashi ARANO >> Tomohiro FUJISAKI >> Tomoya YOSHIDA >> Toshiyuki HOSAKA >> >> Proposal Version: 2 >> >> Submission Date: 2007/08/17 >> >> Proposal type: new >> >> Policy term:renewable >> >> Policy statement: >> >> 1) Distribute a single /8 to each RIR at the point when new IANA free >> pool hits 5 */8. This date is defined as "IANA Exhaustion Date". >> >> 2) It should be completely left up to each RIR communities to define a >> regional policy on how to distribute the remaining RIR free pool to >> LIRs within their respective regions after "IANA Exhaustion Date". >> >> Note 1: It is fine for an RIR to continue operations with the >> existing policy if that is the consensus decision of the >> respective RIR community. >> >> Note 2: Address recovery and re-distribution of recovered address >> space is another important measure for considerations, but >> should be treated as a separate policy proposal from >> distribution of new IANA pool. >> >> 3) RIRs should provide an official projection on IANA Exhaustion Date >> to the community through their website, at their Policy Meetings >> and through any other effective means. >> >> >> Rationale: >> [current problem] >> There are two major issues in terms of address management if no measures >> are taken for IPv4 address exhaustion. >> >> 1) Continue applying a global coordinated policy for distribution of the >> last piece(s) of RIR's unallocated address block does not match the >> reality of the situation in each RIR region. >> >> Issues each RIR region will face during the exhaustion period vary by >> region as the level of development of IPv4 and IPv6 are widely >> different. As a result, applying a global co-ordinated policy may not >> adequately address issues in a certain region while it could be work >> for the others. >> >> For example, in a region where late comers desperately need even >> small blocks of IPv4 addresses to access to the IPv4 Internet, a >> policy that defines the target of allocations/assignments of IPv4 >> address space to be late comers would be appropriate in such region. >> This would allow availablilty of IPv4 address space for such >> requirements for more years. >> >> Another example comes from difference in IPv6 deployment rate. >> For a region where IPv6 deployment rate is low, measures may be >> necessary to prolong IPv4 address life for the existing business as >> well as for new businesses until networks are IPv6 ready. Some >> regions may have strong needs to secure IPv4 address space for >> translators. >> >> A globally coordinated policy which addresses all the issues listed >> above to meet the needs for all RIR regions may result in not solving >> issues in any of the regions. >> >> 2) LIRs and stakeholders remain unprepared for the situation if they are >> not informed >> >> If LIRs and the community are uninformed of the exhaustion, their >> services and networks remain unprepared to face the situation at the >> time of exhaustion. >> >> [Objective of the proposal] >> This proposal seeks to provide the following solutions to the problems >> listed above. >> >> 1) RIR community should be able to define their own regional policies on >> how to assign the last piece(s) of allocation block in order to >> address their own regional issues during the exhaustion period. >> >> 2) RIRs should provide official projection of the date when LIRs will be >> able to receive the allocations under the current criteria. The >> criteria should remain consistent until this date in order to avoid >> confusion. >> >> [Pros and Cons] >> Pros: >> + It allows each RIR community to define a policy on how to distribute >> the last piece(s) of allocations which best matches their situation. >> >> + It helps LIR better informed of the date when they are able to receive >> allocations from RIRs under the current criteria and prepare for the >> event. >> >> Cons: >> + Concerns could be raised about allocating a fixed size to all RIRs, >> that it artificially fastens the consumption rate of some RIR regions. >> However, its impact is kept to minimum by keeping the allocation size >> to a single /8 which makes merely 3-4 months difference. >> >> + Concerns could be raised that explicitly allowing regional policies >> will encourage RIR shopping. However, this should not happen if the >> requirements within each region is adequately reflected in each RIR's >> policy through PDP. RIR may also chose to add criteria to prevent LIRs >> from other regions submitting such requests. >> >> >> Timetable for implementation: >> Immediate after all 5 RIRs (and possibly ICANN) ratifies the policy. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy >> Mailing List (PPML at arin.net). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN Member Services >> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. >> _______________________________________________ >> PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy >> Mailing List (PPML at arin.net). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN Member Services >> Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy > Mailing List (PPML at arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN Member Services > Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
- Previous message: [ppml] Policy Proposal: End Policy for IANA IPv4 allocations to RIRs
- Next message: [ppml] ARIN commments regarding Lame Delegation Policy
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the PPML mailing list