[ppml] IPv4 "Up For Grabs" proposal

[James Hess]

> 4) "Up for Grabs" IP space will be usable by any organization needing
> IPv4 numbering.  None of the RIR's will provide any sort of mediation
> between competing organizations wanting to use the same IPv4 space,
> except for that provided for in #2

It's not that ARIN can't do that, it's that I don't think it makes
sense to do that.

Essentially, I wonder how "no stewardship at all," by intending to incite chaos
over some addresses, counts as responsible stewardship, as per ARIN's mission.


However, in case the policy were implemented that way...

Once random orgs start trying to pick at "up for grabs space", I worry
if there's
much to keep the up-for-grabbers away from doing the same, trying to
use space that was actually legitimately assigned by the current registry, but
the org doesn't "think" is being used.

I expect ARIN could lose legitimacy not only with the legacy holders,
but a lot of
people out there, who rely on there not being total and utter addressing chaos.


Recall.. ARIN/etc is not the actual mechanism that allows or disallows
an organization
from using address space.

The registry itself can't prevent two determined parties from trying
to use the same
addresses, that is not the function of ARIN.; Only if they are both
registrants, can
it help, and that is only done only by making sure not to assign the
two registrants the
same addresses.


Possibly, if providers found that ARIN said "anything goes" for the
legacy assignments,
the providers would just come up with their own ad-hoc rules to pick
up where ARIN left
a big hole.

I.E. some of the legacy registrants would become further solidified,
when their providers
develop ad-hoc filters to discard attempts by "rogue orgs" to announce
prefixes that
would be "up for grabs" according to ARIN
(rogue orgs being anything other than the legacy holder).

Otherwise, the IP address would no longer be globally unique, making
it useless to everyone.    Now all the legacy holders would suddenly
have a justifiable need for new addressing,  they may even be able to
justify larger assignments than they had before.

Exhaustion could occur even more quickly at that point.


ARIN only provides the service of assuring registrants that their
assignments are
unique among other registrants, which is a pre-requisite for their networks
being able to communicate with each other.

It is providers themselves that respect whatever ARIN's registry says a range
is assigned to.

I think they know better than to accept "up for grabs".

Either that means the addresses become useless, or the consequence is the legacy
holder gets them permanently, even if the legacy holder later decides to return
addresses, filters may remain in place all over the world.

It's not hard to have chaos, but how can you have it one little range
of addresses
and really be assured of not have it  all over the place?

--
-J