Encouraging return of legacy space WAS Re: [ppml] ARIN Policy Proposal 2002-9
billd at cait.wustl.edu
Wed Oct 2 16:27:41 EDT 2002
FYI on this issue, there is RFC 1917 which specifically requests the return
of unused networks...
An Appeal to the Internet Community to Return
Unused IP Networks (Prefixes) to the IANA
Network Working Group
Request for Comments: 1917
Category: Best Current Practice
P. Nesser II
Nesser & Nesser Consulting
ARIN Advisory Council
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Conrad [mailto:david.conrad at nominum.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 2:46 PM
> To: Trevor Paquette; 'Mury'; sigma at smx.pair.com
> Cc: ARIN PPML
> Subject: Re: Encouraging return of legacy space WAS Re: [ppml] ARIN
> Policy Proposal 2002-9
> I think you'd be surprised. Two data points: Stanford
> University returned a
> /8. BBN returned a couple of /8s I believe.
> The last time an effort was undertaken to encourage people to
> return address
> space, it was fairly successful.
> On 10/2/02 12:24 PM, "Trevor Paquette"
> <Trevor.Paquette at TeraGo.ca> wrote:
> > Actually.. I would be willing to bet just about any amount
> of money that
> > no-one would 'voluntarily' return unused IP space. If a
> company has it.. they
> > are going to keep it. Period. I challenge someone to prove
> > Chapter 11, etc. does not count; these are companies who
> are doing well. Try
> > to encourage them to return their unused IP space..
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On
> >> Behalf Of Mury
> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 12:25 PM
> >> To: sigma at smx.pair.com
> >> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> >> Subject: Encouraging return of legacy space WAS Re: [ppml]
> ARIN Policy
> >> Proposal 2002-9 (fwd)
> >> Speaking of which, I've seen this encouraging language come
> >> up a lot over
> >> the last couple years.
> >> It seems to me that "encouraging" takes more than talking
> >> about it on some
> >> mailling list. What has ARIN done to encourage the return of IP
> >> space? It seems to me that it wouldn't hurt to pay someone
> >> to make some
> >> phone calls again.
> >> In fact, it seems that Jim wants a piece of the ARIN money
> >> pot, so maybe
> >> ARIN could contract with him to "encourage" the return of
> >> that wasted IP
> >> space... half joking.
> >> ARIN should draft a policy or something similiar that
> addresses this
> >> wasted IP space. It probably shouldn't be a policy because
> >> you don't want
> >> unenforable policies, but there should be something. And
> then there
> >> should be a little bit of money set aside to contact these
> >> space holders.
> >> Mury
> >> On Wed, 2 Oct 2002 sigma at smx.pair.com wrote:
> >>>> Why not make policy so that the current holders of
> >> multiple /8-24s have
> >>>> to renumber then (the ones that do not meet the current
> >> criteria)? That
> >>>> would certainly yield same additional address space, wouldn`t it?
> >>> It's much, much easier to set policy going forward than it
> >> is to impose and
> >>> enforce policy retroactively. When you're talking about
> >> allocations that
> >>> predate ARIN, how exactly is ARIN supposed to take action?
> >> ARIN should
> >>> focus on the best possible management of the remaining IP
> >> space, while
> >>> encouraging and requesting that companies with legacy
> >> assignments return
> >>> them whenever possible.
> >>> Kevin
More information about the ARIN-PPML