[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-127: Shared Transition Space for IPv4 Address Extension

Hannigan, Martin marty at akamai.com
Thu Jan 20 14:58:14 EST 2011

Tentative support. I understand the problems, technical and financial, that
the cable operators are facing and think that this idea is at least worth a
discussion. There's room for the proposal to tighten up a bit with respect
to overall use, but we can wait and see what the overall feedback is.

I took the pointer that Wes gave as well with respect to the IETF mailing
list and while I think that while a lot of the issues were hashed out,
things change with respect to making this regional and reducing the size to
a /10. I'm also sympathetic to the cost implications of failing, for them
and for [you]. The proposal is not necessarily unreasonable, but we should
be careful to work closely with the authors to insure that what we end up is



On 1/20/11 11:26 AM, "ARIN" <info at arin.net> wrote:

> ARIN received the following policy proposal and is posting it to the
> Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) in accordance with the Policy
> Development Process.
> The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review the proposal at their next
> regularly scheduled meeting (if the period before the next regularly
> scheduled meeting is less than 10 days, then the period may be extended
> to the subsequent regularly scheduled meeting). The AC will decide how
> to utilize the proposal and announce the decision to the PPML.
> The AC invites everyone to comment on the proposal on the PPML,
> particularly their support or non-support and the reasoning
> behind their opinion. Such participation contributes to a thorough
> vetting and provides important guidance to the AC in their deliberations.
> Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
> The ARIN Policy Development Process can be found at:
> https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
> Mailing list subscription information can be found
> at: https://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/
> Regards,
> Communications and Member Services
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> ## * ##
> ARIN-prop-127: Shared Transition Space for IPv4 Address Extension
> Proposal Originator: Chris Donley, CableLabs
> Proposal Version: 1
> Date: 20 January 2011
> Proposal type: modify
> Policy term: permanent
> Policy statement:
> Updates 4.10 of the NRPM:
> A second contiguous /10 IPv4 block will be reserved to facilitate IPv4
> address extension. This block will not be allocated or assigned to any
> single organization, but is to be shared by Service Providers for
> internal use for IPv4 address extension deployments until connected
> networks fully support IPv6. Examples of such needs include: IPv4
> addresses between home gateways and NAT444 translators.
> Rationale:
> The Internet community is rapidly consuming the remaining supply of
> unallocated IPv4 addresses.  During the transition period to IPv6, it is
> imperative that Service Providers maintain IPv4 service for devices and
> networks that are currently incapable of upgrading to IPv6.
> Consumers must be able to reach the largely IPv4 Internet after
> exhaustion.  Without a means to share addresses, people or organizations
> who gain Internet access for the first time, or those who switch
> providers, or move to another area, will be unable to reach the IPv4
> Internet.
> Further, many CPE router devices used to provide residential or
> small-medium business services have been optimized for IPv4 operation,
> and typically require replacement in order to fully support the
> transition to IPv6 (either natively or via one of many transition
> technologies).  In addition, various consumer devices including
> IP-enabled televisions, gaming consoles, medical and family monitoring
> devices, etc. are IPv4-only, and cannot be upgraded.  While these will
> eventually be replaced with dual-stack or IPv6 capable devices, this
> transition will take many years.  As these are typically consumer-owned
> devices, service providers do not have control over the speed of their
> replacement cycle.  However, consumers have an expectation that they
> will continue to receive IPv4 service, and that such devices will
> continue to have IPv4 Internet connectivity after the IPv4 pool is
> exhausted, even if the customer contracts for new service with a new
> provider.
> Until such customers replace their Home Gateways and all IPv4-only
> devices with IPv6-capable devices, Service Providers will be required to
> continue to offer IPv4 services through the use of an IPv4 address
> sharing technology such as NAT444.  A recent study showed that there is
> no part of RFC1918 space which would not overlap with some IPv4
> gateways, and therefore to prevent address conflicts, new address space
> is needed.
> Service providers are currently presented with three options for
> obtaining sufficient IPv4 address space for NAT444/IPv4 extension
> deployments: (1) Request allocations under the NRPM; (2) share address
> space with other providers (this proposal); or (3) use address space
> allocated to another entity (i.e. Œsquat¹).  Of the three options,
> option 2 (this proposal) is preferable, as it will minimize the number
> of addresses used for IPv4 extension deployments while preserving the
> authority of IANA and RIRs.
> Timetable for implementation: immediately
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list