[arin-ppml] ARIN-2011-4: Reserved Pool for Critical Infrastructure- Last Call

Leo Bicknell bicknell at ufp.org
Tue Apr 19 17:35:28 EDT 2011

In a message written on Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 07:45:02PM +0000, George, Wes E IV [NTK] wrote:
> I'm less opposed to a carve-out for IXPs and/or root servers, but even that I think needs some justification. 

I'll speak to that directly as my employer operates a root server,
although I think the general argument applies to TLD's as well.

It's our job (along with other root operators) to serve the entire
user community for as long as IPv4 sticks around.  New root servers
are turned up on a regular basis.  We try to place them closer to
large end user populations for lower latency, but new nodes are
also needed for capacity reasons.

The "crest" of IPv4 will be /after/ ARIN runs out of IPv4 addresses.
The last addresses have to be used, and service providers will for
a short time try to be more efficient with their existing blocks.
During this continued rise critical infrastructure must continue
to grow with the user base.

I understand people's concerns that we may get hundreds/thousands/billions
of more TLD's, depending on what ICANN does.  I think it's unlikely
that the root operators rate of gowth or IX rate of growth will
change significantly.  Personally I don't want to exclude the TLD
folks, but I also can't come up with any good languge to address
the potential for explosive TLD growth.  I would go with it as is,
since I think explosive TLD growth is unlikely in the relevant time

       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/20110419/4db314cc/attachment-0001.sig>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list