[arin-ppml] ARIN-2011-6: Returned IPv4 Addresses - Last Call

[Scott Leibrand]

On Apr 22, 2011, at 10:42 AM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote:
>> GPP-IPv4-2010 (the second) - Adopted in ARIN, under discussion in
>> LACNIC and AfriNIC, withdrawn from RIPE, abandoned in APNIC (there is
>> VERY little possibility of this ever becoming global policy without
>> re-submission in all of the other four regions)
>>
>> GPP-IPv4-2011 (the new one) - Moving forward in APNIC, on docket in
>> ARIN, to be discussed in the other three regions (this has the highest
>> likelyhood of becoming a global policy, if we adopt it unchanged here
>> in ARIN)
>
> And here's at least one problem with the AC's new verbiage:
>
> Neither of these proposals specify how ARIN should select addresses
> for return to IANA, but as soon as either of them is adopted the
> prohibition on returning addresses evaporates without any clarifying
> instructions from the community as to what addresses ARIN should
> return.

Would you be interested in helping draft language clarifying what
addresses ARIN should return in the event of a global policy for the
distribution of addresses from IANA?

The version of ARIN-2011-6 presented one possible approach, which
would be that no addresses should be returned at all.  That approach
was rejected by the community at the San Juan meeting, IMO because a
lot of people perceived it as too selfish and parochial.

In light of that, any revised language setting policy for whether/when
to return addresses to IANA would need to go to Philadelphia for
discussion.  The question at hand for this last call is whether you
feel it's appropriate to take the smaller step (which IMO did have
consensus at the meeting) of not allowing return to IANA in the
absence of distribution policy there.

Additional thoughts welcome, particularly from anyone who hasn't
expressed their opinion yet on the ARIN-2011-6 last call.

-Scott