[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 2010-10 - Global Policy for IPv4 Allocations by the IANA Post Exhaustion

[David Farmer]

On 9/1/10 14:41 CDT, Hannigan, Martin wrote:
>
> On 9/1/10 3:22 PM, "Owen DeLong"<owen at delong.com>  wrote:
>
>> Chris,
>>
>> Consider the following two possibilities:
>>
>> 1. We put forth a policy which can pass in the APNIC region which allows IANA
>> to allocate returned space.
>>
>> 2. We don't get a global policy and the ITU uses that fact as an example of
>> why the RIR system cannot be trusted with such a vital resource.
>
> Doesn't the discrepancy in transfer policy already do that?

Possibly, but that is a smaller and harder string to pull on, hard 
choices had to be made and we made them.  All of the regions didn't come 
to exactly the same conclusions, but there is more the same then there 
is different.  Yes, there is an important difference, but I believe that 
is way we have multiple regions.  Because there are sometime 
differences, and multiple regions with distinct local policies allow for 
that, this is a strength more than a weakness.

However, right now regarding a post run-out IANA allocation policy, we 
haven't made those hard choices.  So, it is at least theoretically 
possible, resources could be stranded at IANA.  The difference is 
pointing out inaction, when it is relatively easy to argue that action 
is necessary, verses arguing that the wrong choices were made.

>> I don't like APNICs transfer policy any more than you do, but I think there is
>> more at stake not having a global policy than the concern about what happens
>> to a few final breadcrumbs of IPv4 or any particular RIR getting more than
>> their share of those crumbs.
>
> I think that we get the message with regards to the transfer section and we
> already identified that the problem with the allocation method was a
> mechanical problem and an suggested update is pending.

Thanks, and I eagerly await the update.

By the way, I do appreciate the work you put into this, and do like the 
way you parsed the transfer issue. Personally, I really like the 
solution you can up with, and I think it is good policy.  However, I 
also recognize that good policy is in the eye of the beholder, and those 
beholding this policy at the APNIC meeting didn't agree.

> Best,
>
> -M<

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota	
2218 University Ave SE	    Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================