[arin-ppml] 2008-6: Emergency Transfer Policy for IPv4 Addresses
tvest at pch.net
Mon Oct 6 11:43:52 EDT 2008
On Oct 6, 2008, at 10:50 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
> crock. whether i get the address space i need from an rir or the
> it's the same address space and i announce it.
Maybe that would be true, if it had any real-world referent -- but it
You get what you "need" from the RIR community-system, by definition,
the definition created and adopted and refined by *you* and your
You don't get what you need from a market; you get whatever *you* can
Maybe that's nothing at all, maybe that's something that good enough
for you, but will be punishing and non-sustainable for your peers --
or maybe it'll be something that, purely by coincidence, is good for
you and also sustainable in the aggregate. But no one's going to care
about that -- because the "the community" is either a failure or a
myth or a scam, right? That's why it doesn't even merit consideration
in planning for address transfers, right?
> and if you think that, three years from now, the rirs will have larger
> blocks to sell than the open market, please share what you're smoking.
Randy, if you think anyone anywhere will have "large blocks" "to sell"
in free pool exhaustion +3 years time, then I need a hit of whatever
And if you're willing to toss out the model of community self-
governance for a paltry 2-3 years of extra profits and/or marginal
convenience for the luckiest and/or best-bankrolled institutions of
the moment, at the expense of everyone else for the rest of time, then
I'll just say that I do not share your priorities.
> and perhaps you have not read any of the routing table analyses. we
> have already lost the routing table battle. it's over 50% crap.
You're suffering from the counterfactual fallacy. Maybe a /24 looked
like certain crap a decade ago. Maybe the full routing table
deaggregated to /24s would be unsustainable. Now ask yourself: why is
it that we don't have a full routing table deaggregated to /24s or
worse today -- and refer to prev. message (2), copied again below.
So we should all make that leap of faith? Why?
> On Oct 6, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Tom Vest wrote:
> That's right Randy. To recap from last week, what makes routing keep
> working under the current paradigm?
> 1. CIDR -- which provides the basic tools.
> 2. Top-level aggregation -- which the RIR community-system provided,
> and kept flexible over time as technology improved and RIR community
> practices changed.
> 3. Filtering -- which was/is only commercially feasible because of
> the top-level aggregation made possible by the RIR community-system.
> 4. Open entry for new routing service providers, which the arms-
> length RIR processes also enabled, and which effectively made
> aggregation and filtering "justifiable" and thus palatable to most
> direct stakeholders, as well as to the few indirect stakeholders/
> outside observer who knew that the system existed and understood the
> basics of how it worked.
> An uncoordinated market will eliminate (2), which will make (3,4)
> impossible, which will cause the current routing paradigm to fail in
> short order.
> Maybe a routing cartel will emerge in time to solve the problem,
> without creating new problems for aspiring new entrants and the ever
> widening audience of attentive external stakeholders. But that's a
> big leap of faith...
More information about the ARIN-PPML