[arin-ppml] Is Emergency action warranted for Policy Proposal 123: Reserved Pool for Critical Infrastructure?
scottleibrand at gmail.com
Tue Dec 7 00:30:52 EST 2010
As written this policy would require ARIN to "place an equivalent of a
/16 of IPv4 address space in a reserve" for this purpose. They could
reserve a number of small blocks, perhaps to match the historical size
distribution of CI space. Or they could even just put a rule into
their allocation scripts that says "stop when you get to a /16 worth
of space left", and let the CI space be whatever's left over at that
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Bill Darte <BillD at cait.wustl.edu> wrote:
> There are over 1000 /24 sized, non-aggregateable blocks in the ARIN free
> pool and only a few hundreds of CI assignments in the past since policy
> inception. Does this mean that there exists sufficient resources to continue
> to handle CI interests for the near future?
> Could that space or part of it be reserved for that use? Does it even need
> to be?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net on behalf of Scott Leibrand
> Sent: Mon 12/6/2010 6:35 PM
> To: ARIN-PPML List
> Subject: [arin-ppml] Is Emergency action warranted for Policy Proposal 123:
> Reserved Pool for Critical Infrastructure?
> We've gotten some good feedback from a few folks on this in the "122 +
> 123 process" thread, so I wanted to summarize where we're at and see
> if anyone else has any more feedback to the AC in preparation for next
> week's AC call. On that call we'll likely discuss whether to put this
> proposal on the AC's docket, if so whether to also designate it as a
> draft policy for adoption discussion, and most likely also whether to
> recommend that the Board invoke the Emergency PDP on this issue.
> Do you feel that Proposal 123 meets an emergency need, and that the
> Emergency PDP should be activated?
> A few comments we've received so far are:
> "122 and 123 should be adopted as draft policies and put through the
> normal process, at least until
> the last /8 is actually allocated." ... "When the last minute arrives,
> I would favor 122 and 123 as emergency policies." (Bill Herrin)
> "we ought to:" ... "establish via emergency procedures a separate /16
> (I would fully support
> a /10) for CI as described in Proposal 123" because "b) the sizes of
> these two pools are small enough in the grand scheme of things that it
> is better to be safe than sorry. c) having two pools rather than one
> will prevent a run-out of all remaining addresses for just one of the
> two purposes, something that might occur if there was just one pool",
> and "we need some space for CI
> in situations where even our best planning didn't anticipate a certain
> need." (Frank Bulk)
> "Emergency? No. That is not to claim that there cannot possibly be
> some future action or event that could cause an emergency, just that I
> do not see one now." (Gary Buhrmaster)
> Additional feedback would be much appreciated.
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 7:01 AM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>> The proposal originator submitted revised text.
>> Communications and Member Services
>> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>> ## * ##
>> Policy Proposal 123: Reserved Pool for Critical Infrastructure
>> Proposal Originator: Martin Hannigan
>> Proposal Version: 3.0
>> Date: 23 Nov 2010
>> Proposal type: Modify
>> Policy term: 36 Months following implementation
>> Policy statement:
>> Upon receipt of the last /8 that the IANA will allocate to ARIN per the
>> Global Policy for the Allocation of the Remaining IPv4 Address Space,
>> ARIN will place an equivalent of a /16 of IPv4 address space in a
>> reserve for Critical Infrastructure. If at the end of the policy term
>> there is unused address space remaining in this pool, ARIN staff is
>> authorized to utilize this space in a manner consistent with community
>> Section 4.10 of the NRPM is insufficient with respect to insuring the
>> continued operation of critical infrastructure. This proposal, if
>> adopted, will protect those resources with a reasonable amount of
>> reserved v4 address space and prevent an overrun of CI needs by NRPM
>> Section 4.10 or any successor. The intent is to separate CI needs and
>> make a distinct pool available to insure the continuity of CI
>> allocations per NRPM Section 4.4 for at least 36 months.
>> This proposal should be considered an emergency proposal. IANA
>> exhaustion is likely to occur prior to the next ARIN meeting.
>> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>> 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.
> 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