[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2010-10 (Global Proposal): Global Policy for IPv4 Allocations by the IANA Post Exhaustion - Last Call (text revised)

[Sweeting, John]

Hi Leo,

If you read the whole paragraph then you will see that legacy space is covered:

Eligible address space includes addresses that are not designated as "special use" by an IETF RFC.
Address space may only be returned by the issuing RIR. Legacy address
holders may return address space directly to the IANA if they so choose.

Interpretation is that this covers all legacy address holders and if any RIR holds legacy space then they are "Legacy address
Holders" and may return the legacy space directly to IANA if they so chose.


On 10/29/10 12:47 PM, "Leo Bicknell" <bicknell at ufp.org> wrote:

In a message written on Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 12:40:10PM -0400, ARIN wrote:
> The AC made the following revisions to the text:
>   - The second sentence in section 2 was changed into two sentences.
> "Eligible address space includes addresses that are not designated as
> "special use" by an IETF RFC. Address space may only be returned by the
> issuing RIR."

I am unsure if I am being pedantic here, or if there is an intent
to exclude legacy space.

Legacy space was not issued by any of the current RIR's.  ARIN may
be able to claim it is the decendant of the issuer (warning, can
of worms), but for instance other RIR's had legacy space transferred
to them years ago.

It is entirely possible to read that sentence as excluding legacy
space as a result, which I hope was not the intention.
s/issuing/responsible/ would clear up any confusion, although I'm
uncleaer why the sentence is needed at all.  Do we really need to
state that IANA shouldn't accept back an APNIC block if RIPE is the
one trying to return it?

--
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/