[arin-ppml] Policy for IANA to hand out v4 post exhaustionquestion.

[Bill Darte]

Ted, 

I know you addressed your question to Marty, but I will speak for
myself. There is a small working group considering what to do about the
proposed Global Policy 2009-3 which was proposed and modified in the
ARIN community.....https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2009_3.html

Seems the major objections in that time were that it 'mandated return'
of virtually all recovered addresses for 'uniform redistribution' to
RIRs through IANA regardless of demand and did not guarantee that the
redistributed addresses would be assigned/allocated against needs-based
policies in the receiving RIRs.

2009-3 had 3 components. 1. Authorize IANA to receive and redistribute
addresses in block sizes smaller than /8  2. Mandate that RIRs would
place recovered addresses in a recovery pool and return them quarterly
to IANA.  3. On 6-month anniversaries Spring and Fall, the IANA would
create a uniform sized unit for redistribution that would be 1/10 of the
recovered pool rounded down to the next CIDR boundry and would allocate
upon justified request a single 'unit' to the requesting RIR for that
6-month period.  A justified request would be one from an RIR with less
than 50% of the unit size currently available.

I believe there is probably broad consensus that item 1. is a good
global policy.  Item 2. and 3. were/are more debateable.  Again, I am
not speaking for the AC when I say that this stalled global policy
should be discussed...globally... to try to have a consensus outcome.

Marty's text calls for a equally sized allocation for each RIR. I'm
interested in knowing if this meets some 'fairness' test and is
congruence with needs-based allocation policy.

Bill Darte
ARIN AC

> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net 
> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Ted Mittelstaedt
> Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 4:20 PM
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy for IANA to hand out v4 post 
> exhaustionquestion.
> 
> Martin,
> 
>    Please explain how John Sweeting's 5/12 AC statement relates to
> this:
> 
>    Let me repeat the relevant section:
> 
> "... the AC would like to advise the community that unless a 
> proposal affecting IPv4 assignments has a compelling benefit 
> for and receives strong initial support from the community 
> the AC will most likely choose to abandon the proposal..."
> 
>    Do you really feel your going to get ARIN support for this?
> 
>    Besides that, IANA handed out six /8's in the first 3 
> months of this year and has only 18 of them left - and I 
> think 2 of them went over the last two weeks.  They have now 
> handed out more than the entire of 2009 and it's not even the 
> 6 month mark.  It's a virtual certainty that they will hit 
> the 5 /8 mark by the middle of next year, and then all the 
> remaining /8's will be flushed out - and IANA will be out of 
> the IPv4 business.
> 
>    It's an almost virtual certainty that IPv4 reclamation post-IANA
> IPv4 runout will remain at the RIR level.  Why would an RIR 
> give IPv4 "back" to IANA post-IANA runout?
> 
>    The sooner that IANA is out of the IPv4 address business 
> the better.  If you want to discuss reclamation policy then I 
> for one would NOT support a global IPv4 reclamation policy 
> that applied to all RIR's.  I'm a fan of IPv4 reclamation but 
> only at the RIR level.
> 
> Ted
> 
> 
> On 5/19/2010 1:11 PM, marty at akamai.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > The hardest part about writing a global policy that 
> instructs the IANA 
> > to do something is how to make it so that it isn't onerous (costly) 
> > and that it is fair and balanced. In the interest of trying to get 
> > something palatable, I wanted to post some work that has 
> transpired on 
> > just this issue for comments and perhaps some fresh ideas.
> >
> > For example, hypothetically of course, if the below were to be 
> > proposed, what would the objections or suggestions to this 
> be? These 
> > are not finished thoughts, just some text around how all 
> five regions 
> > might deem the fairness issue.
> >
> >
> > --draft
> > X.X.X.X Address Allocation from the Reclaimation Pool when Demand 
> > Exceeds Supply
> >
> > When the Reclaimation Pool has less address space than is 
> required to 
> > fulfill the projected demand, each RIR will be offered an equally 
> > sized allocation.
> >
> > Aggregates in the Reclaimation Pool may be divided on a 
> CIDR boundary 
> > up to the shortest minimum allocation / assignment of each of the 
> > RIRs, excluding micro-allocations / assignments in order to 
> complete these allocations.
> > Addresses that are left over will be held in the Reclaimation Pool 
> > until additional IP addresses are returned.
> >
> > --End draft
> >
> > Of course, this isn't the whole work product, but again I 
> think that 
> > aside from the politics, this is the hardest part of 
> getting a solid 
> > policy accepted and implemented.
> >
> > There was some thought about an option of "When Supply 
> exceed Demand". 
> > Does anyone think that this condition would be an important 
> > consideration in a global policy that allows the IANA to 
> allocate returned v4 post exhaustion?
> >
> >
> > I'm hoping to cull a few options from the respective community.
> >
> > Negative, positive, constructive and amusing feedback appreciated.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > -M<
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>