[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 122: Reserved Pool for Future Policy Development

Leo Bicknell bicknell at ufp.org
Wed Nov 24 09:37:51 EST 2010

In a message written on Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 03:02:01AM -0500, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
> I think that there's almost enough information to get people on the same
> page. We're still not sure what the "final" inventory of address space will
> be with respect to the last /8's; 3 x /8 at the end or 1 x /8 at the end to
> add to whatever may be in reserve. Reserve pools are allowed for under the
> current global allocation policy and are not counted when seeking new /8's.

I am confused by your statement.  My understanding of the current
policy framework is that ARIN will allocate all IP space not reserved
for some purpose, and the only reservations I know of are the /10
we're discussing and the /16 proposed for CI.  There is no other

> > We need to get out of the mindset that if someone has totally ignored
> > IPv6 transition we have something good waiting for them in the wings.
> > We don't.
> The idea is somewhat of a continued transition and supporting the presence
> of a v4 network for "some" period of time beyond exhaustion, among other
> things, isn't it?

I have always seen what you describe as a stretch goal.  It's not
so far out of reach I would call it impossible, but I also don't
have any confidence that we can reach it.

My largest concern is that we seem to be going into this situation
with a bit too much confidence.  Many folks feel confident that
after runout (IANA+ARIN) what we will need is a pool of space for
transition technologies.  I think that is likely but not certain,
and I also think there are other possibilities.

In any large transition like this there will be unforeseen circumstances.
By their very nature they can't be predicted, so there is no way
to plan for them now other than having a pool of resources available.
It's the equivalent to a fire department; you can't predict where
and when a fire or car crash will occur, but it is prudent to invest
in equipment and training because something will happen.

It is for this reason I am very down on deciding what to do with
the last /10 ahead of time.  I can see a spectrum of possibilities,
from the chance of allowing first time resource recipients a
competitive foothold to it being barely enough to keep critical and
necessary services online.  The only way to know is to go through
exhaustion and come out the other side, and where the chips fall.

To put it simply, we have set aside a "Dedicated IPv4 block to
facilitate IPv6 Deployment", and I am arguing that we may need a
"Dedicated IPv4 block to keep the IPv4 internet from falling apart".
I can't be sure though, and I can't be sure we can't do both.
Reserve it all, find out what goes wrong and where the need is
greatest, and then pass a policy quickly to address it.  1-3 months
of no space followed by relief where it is needed most is far more
useful than the chance blowing the space on something other than
the greatest need.

       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 826 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20101124/59710c53/attachment.sig>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list