[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks (ASNs) to Regional Internet Registries

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Fri May 29 15:07:41 EDT 2009

While I do not support changing the RIR policy on the issuance of ASNs,
I do support this policy proposal.  I think that modifying the IANA->RIR
distribution rules to accommodate the needs of RIRs to better serve  
constituents makes sense. Further, having 16-bit ASNs trapped in the
IANA free pool because 32-bit ASNs are not being accepted by recipients
is absurd and poor stewardship. We should go ahead and issue 16-bit
ASNs until they run out.

I would suggest that this proposal, rather than removing the distinction
in 2010 should be modified to extend the IANA->RIR duality until such
time as there are no more 16-bit ASN blocks in the IANA pool.


On May 29, 2009, at 8:11 AM, Member Services wrote:

> ARIN received the following policy proposal and is posting it to the
> Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) in accordance with Policy  
> Development
> Process.
> This proposal is in the first stage of the Policy Development Process.
> ARIN staff will perform the Clarity and Understanding step. Staff does
> not evaluate the proposal at this time, their goal is to make sure  
> that
> they understand the proposal and believe the community will as well.
> Staff will report their results to the ARIN Advisory Council (AC)  
> within
> 10 days.
> The AC will review the proposal at their next regularly scheduled
> meeting (if the period before the next regularly scheduled meeting is
> less than 10 days, then the period may be extended to the subsequent
> regularly scheduled meeting). The AC will decide how to utilize the
> proposal and announce the decision to the PPML.
> In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on the 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 Policy Development Process can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
> Mailing list subscription information can be found
> at:https://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/
> Regards,
> Member Services
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> ## * ##
> Policy Proposal: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Policy for
> Allocation of ASN Blocks (ASNs) to Regional Internet Registries
> Proposal Originator: Stacy Hughes and Andrew de la Haye
> Proposal Version: 1.0
> Date: 29 May 2009
> Proposal type: modify
> Policy term: permanent
> Policy statement:
> Modification of NRPM section 10.3 extending the deadline for an
> undifferentiated ASN pool by 1 year to read:
> 1. Allocation Principles
> IANA allocates ASNs to RIRs in blocks of 1024 ASNs. In this document  
> the
> term "ASN block" refers to a set of 1024 ASNs. Until 31 December 2010,
> allocations of 16-bit and 32-bit only ASN blocks will be made  
> separately
> and independent of each other [1].
> This means until 31 December 2010, RIRs can receive two separate ASN
> blocks, one for 16-bit ASNs and one for 32-bit only ASNs from the IANA
> under this policy. After this date, IANA and the RIRs will cease to  
> make
> any distinction between 16-bit and 32-bit only ASNs, and will operate
> ASN allocations from an undifferentiated 32-bit ASN allocation pool.
> Rationale:
> a. Arguments supporting the proposal
> Due to operational issues external to the IANA/RIR policy process,
> 32-bit only ASNs are not being issued by the RIRs at the anticipated
> rate. As it stands, RIRs will likely not be able to justify a new  
> block
> of ASNs from the IANA after 31 December 2009 due to a glut of free 32
> bit only ASNs in the RIR’s pool. This leaves available, essential 16- 
> bit
> ASNs stranded in the IANA free pool. This proposal seeks to remedy the
> potential problem by extending the deadline for differentiation by one
> year.
> With this proposal the policy will be aligned with the actual  
> reality in
> regards to 32-bit ASN deployment and usage.
> The subject was raised during RIPE 58 and a presentation was made:
> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-58/content/presentations/asn32-take-up-report.pdf
> The feedback in this session suggested that a global policy proposal
> should be developed and should be discussed.
> b. Arguments opposing the proposal
> Some may think that extending the previously set timeline can be
> perceived as some discouragement for the deployment of 32-bit ASNs.  
> One
> counter argument to this is that RIRs and Internet community have some
> other mechanisms and activities to raise awareness for 32-bit ASN pool
> (via public presentations and trainings). These activities will  
> continue
> while 16-bit ASN blocks are still allocated to RIRs by the IANA as  
> they
> are available and they are needed.
> Timetable for implementation: Immediately upon ratification by ICANN  
> Board
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list