[ppml] Policy Proposal: IPv4 Soft Landing (version 2.0)
drc at virtualized.org
Wed Aug 22 19:44:44 EDT 2007
Thanks for the input.
On Aug 22, 2007, at 2:12 PM, Azinger, Marla wrote:
> -I don't support this.
> -Let it run out.
An understandable position to take. I'll admit I am somewhat
skeptical that governments around the world will be willing to accept
> Write a policy figuring out what ARIN does once contiguous requests
> cant be met.
I agree. Regardless of the approach ARIN takes in the lead up to run
out, a policy proposing what should be done post run out would
definitely be warranted.
> -If we do this and other RIR's don't we are just holding ourselves
> back from more allocations from IANA while others continue to
> receive more.
As has been pointed out, the incremental approach of "Soft Landing"
would allow the ARIN community to revise the policy should it be
determined that the ARIN region is being disadvantaged. In any
event, I will be proposing something like "Soft Landing" to the other
RIRs (missed the APNIC deadline, but hope to get something to RIPE
and AfriNIC soon).
> -This is similar to another proposal. We should combine Decreasing
> Exponential Rationing of IPv4 IP Addresses with this one if we want
> to look at an approach like this.
While I will admit to not having been able to spend the time to fully
understand the "Decreasing Exponential Rationing" proposal, I do not
believe it to be that similar to "Soft Landing". "Soft Landing" is
an attempt to encourage IPv6 deployment by explicitly adding
requirements that encourage migration of infrastructure and services
to IPv6, ultimately tying the allocation of additional IPv4 addresses
to demonstrations of availability of IPv6 services. "Decreasing
Exponential Rationing" merely constrains the amount of IPv4 address
space being allocated. Also, I think fixed thresholds of IANA /8s
are a lot easier for folks to understand than mathematical formula.
Again, thanks for the input.
More information about the ARIN-PPML