mysidia at gmail.com
Sun Feb 28 05:11:23 EST 2010
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:15 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
> Note that the ITU proposal for CIRs does not propose to make them exclusive, but rather proposes that an ITU-mediated CIR be an additional option. If one supports competing ISPs, why not alternative address registries? One cannot argue against this option on the grounds that we don't have enough ipv6 addresses to make it viable; we do. One cannot argue against it on the grounds that it messes up the efficiency of routing, because new, RIR-sanctioned NIRs or new RIRs carved out of existing ones would have basically the same effects on routing.
As I understand the NIRs didn't receive their own blocks of
addresses, or get any blocks that were distinctly theirs,
automatically, to do with as they please. And the NIRs only approve
allocation to users within their region, the addresses are truly
still allocated by RIR.
The ITU proposal implies a breakdown of hierarchical addressing,
which would have profound negative impact on the efficiency of
routing, if it were to be implemented, in terms of fragmentation,
number of prefixes, and
Since it then becomes impossible to aggregate at the RIR level and
keep out-of-region routing announcements out of your table, when there
are hundreds of countries applying for and receiving new additional
allocations interspersed throughout an ITU assignment.,...
It is not as if the choice to create RIRs instead of assigning
IP blocks to countries in the first place, was some arbitrary policy
decision or a "division of resources" decision .
Allocating fixed sized blocks to countries "CIRs" is a polar
opposite to efficient utilization of IP address space and
There ought to be some sort of justification criteria that needs to be
met for the creation of new IP address registries, including respect
for the IPv6 addressing model and hierarchical addressing.
Just like there needs to be justification criteria for the creation of
Basically it sounds as if the ITU wants to just ignore the IP
addressing model, and get a big block to do their own thing. That
might be fine if their "alternative" were to cleanly preserve
the hierarchical properties of IP addressing, and weren't excessively
But it appears that of the proposal (A) it is excessively wasteful, and
(B) they really want to break things....
More information about the ARIN-PPML