[ppml] With additional comments on global policy RE: Encouraging return of legacy space
John M. Brown
john at chagres.net
Fri Oct 4 15:42:41 EDT 2002
ICANN / IANA is basically the GIR (Global IP Registry)
They have responsibility to make sure the RIR's (Regional
IP Registry's) follow RFC 2050, just like those that are
allocated space from the RIR's.
IANA could request an audit of any of the RIR's allocations
to make sure they are following RFC 2050, and that the
(to use a RIPE term) LIR's are also following RFC-2050.
The RIR's do not like the fact that they have to get space
from IANA. In fact there is movement within the RIR's
to attempt to separate themselves from the ICANN / IANA
process and move towards a "self regulated" model and
admin the entire space within this "self regulated" model.
This would allow them the freedom and the autonomy to make
and set policy that is independent of the IANA or ICANN
processes. It would remove any "third party" appeal process
for requesters of numeric address space.
Prior to the death of Jon Postel, he handle appeals from
requesters when InterNIC or the RIR's declined an IP
Today, that appeal process is thin at best. It needs to be
put back in place and strengthened.
The IANA needs to step up to the plate and take a solid
leadership role in this and other technical processes.
The IANA *MUST* reclaim and re-earn the technical respect
of the community if these processes are to succeed, for
if they do not, then "self regulation" will fail and
government or treaty (read ITU, FCC, FTC, Homeland Security)
organizations will step in and tell us how it should be done.
In short the IANA needs a CTO, a Chief Technical Officer.
This person is someone with solid technical clue and
credibility in the community, and a person that has the
modesty yet strength and diplomatic ability to worth with
diverse people and organizations during debates.
Originally this was a role that Dr. Postel was to take. His
untimely death created a void that was not filled.
It *MUST* be a person that has had significant technical
operational experience and has dealt with real world internet
technology development and deployment.
Today many people are attempting to fill these shoes with the
added baggage of their own agendas. Each is earnest in their
beliefs that they are doing the right thing, for their scope
All the petty bickering, finger pointing, claims of not
listening to each other, etc need to be squashed.
"We The Community" must ensure that the "Net is for EVERYONE",
and to do that we must be active and participate. We must act
as grown ups and not be distracted.
We must be relentless in assuring that the Net is in fact for
Everyone. The net is not for just America or Europe or Asia, its
for all races on this planet. Each region has its own customs
and laws, all must be respectful of those and not try to enforce
a single view on others. The net is transforming and empowering
the people of this planet like nothing in history has done before.
This is causing some governments concern.
As we move to dealing with policy issues, here in the PPML, or
in other forums it is important to understand that good policies
are those that balance many different and sometimes competing
I am actively encouraging members and lurkers of this and other
lists to get involved.
Technology people (read geeks) normally shy away from politics,
policy talks and the like. That's left for the "suits". The
issue here is if we leave it to the "suits" they will tell us
that PI is 3, not 3.1415..... The technical community *MUST*
become more involved, must learn how to work with the "suits"
and help each other.
The ARIN community *MUST* become more involved with policy
formation and with the actions that ARIN, a bottom up membership
based organization, takes.
Get involved, Stay involved. It takes time, but if YOU don't
who will ???
John M. Brown
Speaking for himself.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Mury
> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 6:24 AM
> To: Michael.Dillon at radianz.com
> Cc: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: RE: Encouraging return of legacy space WAS Re:
> [ppml] ARIN Policy Proposal 2002-9
> > While it may be a good idea to contact holders of large amounts of
> > legacy
> > IPv4 addresses in the Class A and Class B ranges to see if
> they will
> > voluntarily return the space to IANA, this type of thing should not
> > concern ARIN at this time. This is the sort of activity
> that should be
> > coordinated globally and it should be done with the
> blessing of IANA and
> > ICANN if it is done at all.
> Hasn't IANA and ICANN basically given ARIN the task of
> managing IP space?
> Perhaps I have missed something. Of course it should have
> IANA's and ICANN's blessing. Why should ARIN have to be
> dictated first by ICANN? I have no clue what goes on at
> ICANN, but I have a suspicion that the people in and around
> ARIN are more in touch with these issues.
> Let me put it to you this way... A father asks that his
> teenage boy to help with more of the yardwork. "Where do I
> start dad?" The father instucts the boy how to mow the yard.
> Upon mowing the yard the boy sees that by trimming some of
> the weeds around the fence the condition of the yard would
> look much better. The boy decides to ask his dad if he can
> trim some of the weeds that the mower couldn't reach. Dad is
> The boy is pleased. The neighbors are pleased.
> Obviously the weeds are those unused legacy IP blocks. ARIN
> should draw up a simple game plan, get all the appropriate
> parties blessings, and at least make another attempt to get
> that IP space back.
> If a company needs a smaller block, I say give it to them for
> free. If in the next 5 years they find out they need more IP
> space, give that to them for free too, but have some sort of
> time limit on the free IP space.
> As far as your global comment, I doubt that many African,
> Asian, Australian, South American, etc. entities are sitting
> on lots of large unused blocks, but I certainly could be
> wrong. And what if I am? Why can't ARIN still do it? Why
> can't they become a model for the process if it works?
> > ARIN members would be better off deploying testbed IPv6 networks and
> > connecting these with other company's testbed IPv6 networks
> in order to
> > gain experience with IPv6. When the address shortage does become
> > significant enough to push customers towards IPv6, it is
> likely to quickly
> > become a tidal wave migration. Historically, IPv4 was
> deployed for many
> > years before there was a sudden exponential demand for it
> in 1994 and
> > 1995. The main reason that ISPs were able to meet the
> demand is that there
> > were a lot of people around who had years of hands-on
> experience running
> > IPv4 networks. At the time they were gaining that
> experience, they didn't
> > know how IPv4 would be used in the future. They didn't
> foresee the web and
> > e-commerce and then decide to run an IPv4 network.
> Similarily, with IPv6
> > we don't need to predict grand future horizons in order to
> find a reason
> > to deploy it today. One small reason is enough and it
> doesn't have to be
> > the same reason for everybody.
> Are you saying that ARIN's resources are so strapped they
> can't blink and breath at the same time? I find this
> extremely hard to believe. If testing IPv6 in the manner you
> suggest is agreed to be useful, why can't ARIN do both?
More information about the ARIN-PPML