[ppml] Policy Proposal: Decreasing Exponential Rationing of IPv4 IP Addresses

[Dean Anderson]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, William Herrin wrote:

> On 8/20/07, Member Services <info at arin.net> wrote:
> > Policy Proposal Name: Decreasing Exponential Rationing of IPv4 IP Addresses
> 
> 
> I oppose this proposal on the grounds that it does not provide
> actionable policy which staff can follow.

What isn't actionable about a specific upper limit?  I see speed limits 
on the roads every day. 

> Dean: Specifics, specifics, specifics. What exactly does this mean in
> terms of how many addresses can be given to organizations given what
> documented or audited utilizations and when? 

What is vague about e^(-x)?

What is vague about the pool of available IP Address?

What is vague about 10 years?

Anyone can calculate this function given only the actual number of 
available IP Adresses. I think the ARIN staff can handle that task.  I 
provide for recalculation when address space is returned.

It is a rationing policy. ARIN is rationing now, as some would say. This
policy just defines an upper limit on delegation. The upper limit is set
by a mathematical function that will keep a IP address space available
for 10 years or more.  

The policy doesn't define the lower limit, nor does it further alter the
policies for delegation.  ARIN staff continue to do what they are doing
now. But just can't exceed the upper limit set by this function.

> And if you want to throw in a bone about contested IP address space,
> you first need to explicitly define how one contests space.

Disputes are usually opened by creating a ticket with ARIN.  I used the
term "contested" because I think that one could reasonably conclude a
block is "contested" by providing ARIN with a court order regarding that
block or ASN number.  'Contested' can come from quarters besides ARIN's
ticketing process.


-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000