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

[Leo Bicknell]

In a message written on Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:19:41AM -0600, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> The policy is about non-connected networks.  The networks that want to
> use IP but   have no intention to interconnect. The community behind
> ARIN is by far one that does interconnect.     Interconnection is
> viewed as a   pre-requisite  for  being part of the community.
> That is..  until you decide to connect your network,  it's just a
> private castle,  you can use IPX for all the world cares.

Actually, it's not about non-connected networks, but rather networks
that are connected, but perhaps not to the entire world.

If the network were truely non-connected, that is not connected to
anything that all, ARIN would require them to use 1918 space and
would not allocate any global resources.

I think there is a lot of misinformation here, because the policy was
originally poorly worded, and because folks aren't taking the time to
read it.  The relevant bit is:

     4.3.5. Non-connected Networks

     End-users not currently connected to an ISP and/or not planning to be
     connected to the Internet are encouraged to use private IP address
     numbers reserved for non-connected networks (see RFC 1918). When
     private, non-connected networks require interconnectivity and the
     private IP address numbers are ineffective, globally unique addresses
     may be requested and used to provide this interconnectivity.

I emphasize "networks require interconnectivity" and "globally
unique addresses may be requested and used to provide this
interconnectivity".  Dispite its name, this policy only applies to
networks that are, in fact, interconnected.

The wording here is really funny in a sad way, "When private,
non-connected networks require interconnectivity"; wait, what?
How can you be non-connected and require interconnectivity?  It only
makes sense if you tilt your head a particular way.

If I may editoralize in a way that I think makes more sense:

     4.3.5. Networks without IP Transit

     End-users not currently connected to an ISP and/or not planning
     to be connected to the Internet should use private IP address
     numbers reserved for non-connected networks (see RFC 1918).

     When private, non-transited networks require interconnectivity
     and the private IP address numbers are ineffective, globally
     unique addresses may be requested and used to provide this
     interconnectivity.

And I'll pick on the Internet 2 folks as a prime example.  Their
backbone IP space does not appear on the commercial Internet, it's
not in a transit table you get from your ISP.  That said, there are
thousands of networks connected to the Internet 2 backbone, and it
would be plainly insane to try and run it with RFC 1918 space.  This
policy allows them to get space to do just that.

If anything should be done in this space it's that something like my
editorialized version should be put into place so there is no confusion
over what the policy is intended to do.  The policy as it is implemented
now is a very good thing, and enables proper and good use of the address
space.  It's being tarred and feathered because someone used a poor
choice of title.

-- 
       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/20110125/87e67c4c/attachment.sig>