[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Depleted IPv4 reserves

[Jo Rhett]

I'm not sure I see what goal you are trying to accomplish with this  
proposal.  Why is it better to cut off larger providers to ensure that  
smaller organizations can continue to get space?   This is good for  
the smaller organization obviously.   Why is it good for the entire  
ARIN region?

On Dec 2, 2008, at 11:53 AM, Member Services wrote:
> ARIN received the following policy proposal. In accordance with the  
> ARIN
> Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, the proposal is being
> posted to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and being  
> placed on
> ARIN's website.
>
> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review this proposal at their next
> regularly scheduled meeting. The AC will assign shepherds in the near
> future. ARIN will provide the names of the shepherds to the community
> via the PPML.
>
> In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on this proposal  
> on
> the PPML, particularly their support or non-support and the reasoning
> behind their opinion. Such participation contributes to a thorough
> vetting and provides important guidance to the AC in their  
> deliberations.
>
> The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at:
> http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html
>
> Mailing list subscription information can be found at:
> http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/
>
> Regards,
>
> Member Services
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>
>
> ## * ##
>
>
> Policy Proposal Name: Depleted IPv4 reserves
>
> Author:  Dan Alexander
>
> Proposal Version: 1
>
> Submission Date: 12/2/2008
>
> Proposal type: New
>
> Policy term: Permanent
>
> Policy statement:
>
> (add the following section to the nrpm)
>
> 4.1.8 Depleted IPv4 reserves
>
> A limit will be applied to all IPv4 address requests when ARIN's  
> reserve
> of unallocated IPv4 address space drops below an equivalent /9. When
> this happens, an ISP or End User may receive up to a single /20  
> within a
> six month period.
>
> Rationale:
>
> As the reserve of IPv4 address space becomes smaller, there is a risk
> that many organizations will be denied resources by a large, last  
> minute
> request. By implementing a throttle on the last of the IPv4 address
> space, a more limited group of organizations will be impacted,  
> allowing
> many organizations to receive ongoing resources during the  
> transition to
> IPv6.
>
> According to the ARIN statistics page
> http://www.arin.net/statistics/index.html, 1,993 organizations were
> issued IP space in 2006 and 2007. Of these allocations 41% of the
> applicants received less than a /20. On the opposite end, 82
> organizations received large blocks. Given that the last reserve of  
> IPv4
> space cannot possibly meet the needs of the 82 organizations, the  
> space
> could be managed in a way to provide for the needs of a wider base of
> consumers while the largest ISP's build momentum behind IPv6.
>
> The goal is to find a balance between the needs of organizations
> requiring space, and avoiding the restrictions on end user growth. For
> this reason, any caps on allocations should be implemented when the
> reserves are essentially depleted, rather than trying to restrict end
> user growth when IP space is still readily available.
>
> By putting a six month window on the maximum allocation, the remaining
> IP space could provide at least one year for everyone to implement  
> other
> solutions while still being able to obtain an IPv4 address allocation.
> The time period was also added to provide a consistent rate of
> depletion, avoiding a scenario where a large organization could queue
> multiple, justifiable requests, resulting in the scenario the proposal
> is intended to avoid.
>
> Additional language may need to be added in the event a paid transfer
> policy is approved. The thinking is to have two pools of available IP.
> One being the current IANA allocated, reserve of IP space. The second
> being IP blocks recovered through monetary incentive. This proposal
> would apply to the IANA allocated reserves and would not apply to  
> blocks
> made available by monetary means.
>
> An additional thought was to avoid tying this policy shift  
> specifically
> to the last /8 allocated by IANA. This allows the policy to come in  
> and
> out of play in the event that IPv4 address space is abandoned or
> returned to ARIN.
>
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

-- 
Jo Rhett
senior geek

Silicon Valley Colocation
Support Phone: 408-400-0550