[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2009-2: Depleted IPv4 reserves
Matthew.Wilder at telus.com
Tue Mar 24 11:48:36 EDT 2009
I agree that there should be some amount of rationing of IP Addresses in the IPv4 endgame. I simply question the fairness of a policy that says everyone can have what they need in IPv4 addresses except those who need more than a /20 every 6 months.
Fairness itself is a loaded word in these discussions. To me, fairness in this case fundamentally implies equal access to IPv4 addresses. The question then becomes the definition of equal access. Is that access to an equal amount of space per organization? Though that sounds good, that answer ignores the philosophy of needs-based allocations. And what about equal amount of space per EU organization represented by an ISP? That would imply that the large ISPs should still have access to the majority of IP Addresses, since they represent the vast majority of internet users in North America.
The starting point for this policy has to be some kind of target objective. If the objective of the policy is to make the last /9 of space last around one year before depletion, without consideration of consistent limitation to vastly different organizations, I think this policy fits the bill.
I think there is a way of making the last /9 last for a year without unequally affecting different organizations. I think the way to implement such a policy more fairly is to limit allocations to a certain percentage of space an organization already has allocated to it. Thus, each organization can have equal geometric growth to their IPv4 address space, and thus everyone has the same limitations placed on them. I don't know the numbers that would accomplish a goal of 1 year spreadout of the last /9, but I would bet it is in the 5-10% ballpark. Note that this kind of policy would prevent a run on ARIN by smaller ISPs and EUs that can request a /20 which might double their IPv4 address space.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts on these ideas!
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2009 3:18 PM
To: Matthew Wilder
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2009-2: Depleted IPv4 reserves
Thanks for your input. Some counterpoints to what you have said that I would like to see some feedback on:
1. Once ARIN reserves drop below, say, a /9, that means that ARIN would
only be able to satisfy a maximum of 32 x-large (/14) requests. Given
that you state there are 24 organizations that suck down 80% of
ARIN resources, I think those organizations are going to have to
face some rather severe limitations soon after we reach that point
either through this policy, or, as the result of ARIN being completely
out of addresses.
2. If those extra large organizations are restricted, along with
else, to getting only a /20 per 6 month period thereafter, yes, they
will be suffering an address shortage, along with everyone else, but,
they will at least be able to get some addresses for some period of
time, and, a much larger number of organizations will be able to get
SOME of their needs met. The assumption that smaller organizations
will qualify for enough address space for 6 years is, in most cases
specious and misleading. This policy would not give a /20 to someone
who would normally qualify only for a /22 based on a 1 year projection.
3. I believe the central question raised by this policy is how does
community want to prioritize the IPv4 end game. Do we want to
provide as much as needed on a first-come-first-serve basis until
we run head-long into the brick wall where nobody can get anything,
or, do we want to reach a threshold where we face an address
shortage for some time before we hit absolute runout.
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:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML