[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Depleted IPv4 reserves

[Seth Mattinen]

michael.dillon at bt.com wrote:
>> Might not be ARIN's problem, but it's foolish to think one is 
>> being useful by handing out useless resources. Verizon 
>> already refuses to accept BGP announcements for anything 
>> smaller than an IPv6 /32.
> 
> If ARIN does nothing then when people ask what the problem
> is, lots of fingers will point at ARIN. But if ARIN allocates
> IPv4 /26's for special circumstances during this unique 
> transition period, when people ask the same question, all
> the fingers will point elsewhere. And if all the fingers
> point at Verizon, they might soon find themselves subject
> to an FTC investigation. Or maybe they will just lose lots
> of customers. Either way, ARIN's actions will help most
> people keep the network running.
> 
> We should not modify ARIN policy just because of foolish
> actions on the part of one or two ISPs.
> 

I wasn't referring to how Verizon is lame for not accepting ARIN /48's 
in IPv6. Verizon is the exception for IPv6 (as far as I know).

The /24 boundary in IPv4 is much more rigorously enforced and far too 
entrenched *everywhere* for the FTC or even God himself to get it all 
out of there for a few special circumstances. I can announce less than a 
/24 right now. It won't get very far. Who in their right mind is going 
to contact every AS in the world and ask "pretty please, will you 
configure every BGP speaking router you have to accept my /26 because 
I'm special?" Their ISP is going to say "we're announcing it, tough luck 
if the rest of the world won't see it". Who does that help except cause 
mass frustration? And since it's an "IPv6 transition network" the 
uninitiated are going to blame IPv6 as something that doesn't work.

~Seth