[arin-ppml] End non-public IPv4 assignments?

[William Herrin]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 12:04 AM, Jimmy Hess <mysidia at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 10:38 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> Let me reverse the question: in light of the situation on the ground
>> today, is there anything you would view as a reasonable justification
>> for an IPv4 allocation or assignment to a single entity which will not
>> be routed on the public Internet? What?
>
> There is only one category of global addressing I can think of that
> would be reasonable for ARIN to allocate for today...  very small
> amounts of address space for use at an IX, but  not globally reachable
> by design.

Hi Jimmy,

I would think that IX addresses are used on the public Internet, just
not globally. They're reachable by everybody who peers at that IX and
all of those folks' customers. I'm more thinking about uses that don't
appear on the public Internet at all or are reachable only from inside
one public AS.

For example, if DoD wanted addresses for the SIPRnet today, would it
still be appropriate for ARIN to allocate them? The SIPRnet is a
classified TCP/IP network which is not permitted to swap packets with
the public Internet.


On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 11:51 PM, Frank Bulk <frnkblk at iname.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure I follow you here.  Can you explain why you are exploring the
> ending of assigning non-public IPv4 assignments?

Hi Frank,

Pure curiousity.  I want to know if there are any reasons for the
practice that are still good enough in light of the address shortage.
Whether the answer suggests any policy changes I leave to someone
else.

Regards,
Bill Herrin




-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004