[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 112: Utilization of 10.4.2 resources only via explicit policy

Fri Apr 30 17:52:36 EDT 2010

Hi Bill,

Current policy and intent of policy results in a reality that any 
normative need is justified. That has been and is good for the network 
and all its users and should continue up until the point where the 
resources to support it dont exist or (this is the point where we 
possibly diverge) the point where their lack of continued existence is 
imminent.

Global continued need for IPv4 will by necessity be redefined as when 
alternatives just wont work as well or at all or that their costs cannot 
be justified or borne.

If and when that mode of need comes into effect, previous utilization 
will appear in hindsight to have been profligate.

I believe we are nearing the point where foresight suggests that 
continued use of the last of the resources in the same manner of 
consumption as all the previous should be considered profligate.

This last /8 is not assigned to ARIN due to normative consumption need. 
It is assigned because it is the last of the freely available resources. 
As such, I feel it is an appropriate place to demarcate the manner of 
consumption in effect.

Normative need for IPv4 cannot continue to be satisfied for much longer 
with this last /8 anyways, so let us trade that for some security, 
insurance, save some ammo, keep a gallon of case in the can, cash under 
the carpet or whatever analogy suits your fancy, to be available if and 
when need has a much sharper definition.

Real benefit by attempting to artificially restrict normative 
utilization of IPv4 before real scarcity is at hand cannot be realized - 
just a multitude of harms. I neither support propose or advocate that.

The truth of the matter is that scarcity has been a constantly 
increasing factor, most of us recall how much easier it was to get 
larger amounts of space for comparatively less need the further back in 
time we go, even under the RiR regime and policy of similar language 
being in effect. Does nobody feel that the resources consumed then could 
have been put to much better use even at this point when there is still 
resources freely available? How would you feel ten years from now, if 
IPv6 doesnt erase IPv4 need and render this whole topic of mere historic 
interest, at best.

If IPv6 does erase IPv4 need, what was the harm? That it happened three 
months earlier?

Joe

Bill Darte wrote:
>
> Hello Joe, George, community
>
> I am the AC's policy shepherd assigned to this policy proposal.
> I will be taking a passive role in monitoring the pro's and con's, the 
> for's and against's.  I will also take an active role if I think 
> further or different inquiry is needed on the subject, or if I am 
> troubled by language or concepts that I believe need clarifying.
>
> To that later end, I wonder, Joe, at your use of the language 
> below...suggesting that existing policy in the assignment and/or 
> allocation of /8 addresses is a 'squandering' of those resources.
>
> If that were true, would you not be better off to proposal policy that 
> remedies those ills?
>
> Bill Darte
> ARIN AC
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net on behalf of Joe Maimon
> Sent: Fri 4/30/2010 3:04 PM
> To: George, Wes E IV [NTK]
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 112: Utilization of 10.4.2 
> resources only via explicit policy
>
> Hi George,
>
> This /8 is not given to ARIN based upon need. It is given based upon its
> status as the last one available from the free pool. There is no
> implicit assumption that it should go to fill needs in the same manner
> as all previous ones. I see no reason that it should be squandered in
> the same manner as all the rest have without at minimum due
> consideration as to possible alternates.
>
> If there wont be enough time to work out policy for this last /8 while
> holding it in reserve, then there definitely will not be time to work
> out policy before it is consumed -- too late. On the other hand, the
> policy process does have the ability to move quickly, such as the
> emergency pdp process.
>
> 4.10 is possibly not enough. We do not know yet.
>
> Joe
>
> George, Wes E IV [NTK] wrote:
> > I oppose this proposal. Justified use and allocation of IPv4 address 
> space under ARIN's current policy is justified use regardless of 
> whether it is the last /8 or not. I agree that there are some reasons 
> to hold addresses in reserve for transition items, but the existing 
> policy already makes provision for that in the form of a /10. It is 
> impossible to say that we as a community will know (and more 
> importantly, agree on) 100% of the reasons why addresses should be 
> allocated in the 10.4.2 endgame and can get them all documented in the 
> policy process in a reasonable amount of time so that this is not an 
> overly inflexible and limiting rule for ARIN staff and users of IPv4 
> space.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Wes
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] 
> On Behalf Of Member Services
> > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 12:00 PM
> > To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 112: Utilization of 10.4.2 
> resources only via explicit policy
> > ## * ##
> >
> >
> > Policy Proposal Name: Utilization of 10.4.2 resources only via explicit
> > policy
> >
> > Proposal Originator: Joe Maimon
> >
> > Proposal Version: 1.0
> >
> > Date: 29 April 2010
> >
> > Proposal type: New
> >
> > Policy term: permanent
> >
> > Policy statement:
> >
> > Add section 4.11
> >
> > 4.11 Last /8 utilization
> >
> > Resources received from IANA under section 10.4.2 (the last /8) will be
> > unavailable for any purposes not explicitly specified, such as 4.10, and
> > will be held in reserve.
> >
> > Rationale:
> >
> > No reason to blow the last /8 as quickly as all the others.
> >
> > Timetable for implementation: Concurrently with 10.4
> >
> >
> > This e-mail may contain Sprint Nextel Company proprietary 
> information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by 
> others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please 
> contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > PPML
> > 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.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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.
>