[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal (Global): Allocation of IPv4 Blocks to Regional Internet Registries - Revised

[Martin Hannigan]

[ clip ]


>
> This policy is to be implemented in two phases.
>
> A. Phase I: Recovery of IPv4 Address Space
>
> Upon ratification of this policy by the ICANN Board of Directors the
> IANA shall establish a mechanism to receive IPv4 address space which is
> returned to it by the RIRs, and hold that address space in a 'recovered
> IPv4 pool'.
>
> Each RIR through their respective chosen policies and strategies may
> recover IPv4 address space which is under their administration. Each RIR
> shall at quarterly intervals return any such recovered address space to
> the IANA in aggregated blocks of /24 or larger, for inclusion in the
> recovered IPv4 pool.



Not in favor of this policy moving forward, again.

How does ARIN justify turning over ip address space to the IANA to address
needs if ARIN  has needs? For example, another region may go to the IANA
under this policy and get an allocation "unit", a ration, that address 100%
of their current need. The ARIN region may go to the well to have only
.0001% of their current need addressed.

Without restrictions on use of the IP address resources that may go back
"the funds", how can we be certain that we aren't fueling the proverbial
corporate jet through the transfer processes in other regions?

This is a disincentive for ARIN to recover address space and an incentive
for a stronger and continuing address space market, gray or not, since it
creates fear that entities with needs will not be able to get v4 address
space. The counter argument that everyone should be migrating to v6 anyhow
becomes a straw man based on this policy.


[ clip ]


> 4. Initial Allocation of IPv4 Address Space
>
> Each new RIR shall, at the moment of recognition, be allocated one (1)
> allocation unit by the IANA. If an allocation unit is not available,
> then the IANA will issue this block as soon as one is available. This
> allocation will be made regardless of the newly formed RIR's projected
> utilization figures and shall be independent of the IPv4 address space
> that may have been transferred to the new RIR by the already existing
> RIRs as part of the formal transition process.



This is to address the MOU and attachment with ICANN? Not being able to
allocate v4 address space to a new RIR does not seem to prevent it's
creation and the MoU does not seem to require a v4 allocation to a new RIR
[beyond exhaustion]. I don't see a reason why[if needed] a new RIR can't be
"pure" v6 and allow this policy to be in compliance with the MoU.

But -- since it is in last call and likely to be accepted in the APNIC
region, suggestions for change are moot. This policy not move forward.

Why not instead create an ARIN policy that sets aside [possibly] recovered
space and open the door to allow "others not normally eligible" to go ahead
and submit needs based requests against such a pool and on an even footing
with existing allocations "if" there is excess space available "and" ARIN's
needs are met and in line with ARIN policy?

Best Regards,

Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20090310/195219da/attachment.htm>