[ppml] FW: Policy Proposal: Global Policy for the Allocation oftheRemaining IPv4 Address Space

[Gary.Allmond at do.treas.gov]

I also do not support the proposed policy. If I read this correctly,
each RIR would get the same amount of IPv4 space. This is penalizes
larger areas while not encouraging slower growth areas to transfer to
IPv6.

Gary Allmond

-----Original Message-----
From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of
Linda
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 8:55 AM
To: ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal: Global Policy for the Allocation
oftheRemaining IPv4 Address Space

I do not support this policy and feel that the current policy is
sufficient.

Regards,
Linda Werner
Satellite Communication Systems, Inc.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andrew Dul" <andrew.dul at quark.net>
To: "Azinger, Marla" <marla.azinger at frontiercorp.com>; <ppml at arin.net>
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: [ppml] Policy Proposal: Global Policy for the Allocation
ofthe 
Remaining IPv4 Address Space


>
>>  ## * ##
>>
>>
>>  Policy Proposal Name:  Global Policy for the Allocation of the
Remaining
>>  IPv4 Address Space
>>
>>      This policy describes the process for the allocation of the
>>  remaining IPv4 space from IANA to the RIRs. When a minimum amount of
>>  available space is reached, an identical number of IPv4 allocation
units
>>  (/8s) will be allocated from IANA to each RIR, replacing the current
>>  IPv4 allocation policy.
>>
>>      In order to fulfill the requirements of this policy, at the time
it
>>  is adopted, an identical number of IPv4 allocation units (N units)
will
>>  be reserved by IANA for each RIR. The number N is defined as: 5.
>>  The reserved allocation units will no longer be part of the
available
>>  space at the IANA pool. The process for the allocation of the
remaining
>>  IPv4 space is divided in two consecutive phases:
>>
>
> I'm not sure this policy is necessary.  I don't specifically think
there 
> is anything wrong with the current policy.
>
> RIRs could develop their own "end of IPv4 allocation schemes" even if
the 
> IANA to RIR policy was not changed.
>
> RIRs use IPv4 resources at different rates due to the different sizes
of 
> the communities they represent. This policy will artificially extend
the 
> availability in some of IPv4 resources in some RIR's, that could lead
to 
> RIR shopping.
>
> I do not support this policy as currently written.
>
> Andrew
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This message sent to you through the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List
> (PPML at arin.net).
> Manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml
>
> 


_______________________________________________
This message sent to you through the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List
(PPML at arin.net).
Manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml