[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-131: Section 5.0 Legacy Addresses

[Martin Hannigan]

It's consistent with terms in the NRPM and with respect to the "L"RSA.
 It's not the regular v4 pool and at least in the interim I think it's
unwise to mix policy across the spectrum with arin or rir-speak.
"Sanctioned" v4 addresses are not going to be part of the fluid v4
economy, but former IANA addresses will be. There is going to be a
level of distinction required hence "section 5.0". Continued policy
writing with respect to, for lack of a better term -- normalized
addresses,  should become sparse as time wears on. At least one would
hope.

Ideas welcomed.

Best.

-M<



On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 7:17 PM, Tony Hain <alh-ietf at tndh.net> wrote:
> Taking Owen's point a little further; IPv4 is 'legacy', so it is
> redundant...
>
> Tony
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
>> Behalf Of Owen DeLong
>> Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011 3:31 PM
>> To: Martin Hannigan
>> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-131: Section 5.0 Legacy Addresses
>>
>> In the spirit of less is more, may I suggest that you remove the word
>> Legacy
>> from both the title and the sentence.
>>
>> Owen
>>
>> On Jan 31, 2011, at 3:23 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>>
>> > On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 2:54 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
>> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 12:02 PM, cja at daydream.com
>> <packetgrrl at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Martin Hannigan
>> <hannigan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>> Do you think that this will suffice?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "Upon expiration of the hold period and in the absence of a Global
>> >>>> Policy or Globally Coordinated Policy directing otherwise, legacy
>> >>>> resources returned to ARIN will be made available for allocation."
>> >>>
>> >>> I think it should say "made available for allocation or assignment"
>> >>
>> >> Right. Allocation and assignment are loaded words in ARIN-speak. If
>> >> you specify the one but not the other in policy, you restrict the
>> >> usage of those addresses. You could also say something like "made
>> >> available for registration," without using either of the two loaded
>> >> words.
>> >
>> >
>> > In the interest of over simplicity, I think that version 2.0 might be
>> > more clear stating:
>> >
>> > "Legacy IPv4 addresses returned to or recovered by ARIN will be made
>> > available for registration within thirty days of their receipt."
>> >
>> > I agree with you with respect to more words, but in this case, I
>> think
>> > that less is more.
>> >
>> >
>> > Best,
>> >
>> > -M<
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > PPML
>> > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
>