[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-127: Shared Transition Space for IPv4Address Extension

Jimmy Hess mysidia at gmail.com
Fri Jan 21 19:07:29 EST 2011

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:50 AM, George Bonser <gbonser at seven.com> wrote:
> I suppose I wish there was a way to *temporarily* allow this and not
> create a mechanism for the perpetuating of manufacturers to continue to
> produce v4-only devices, which they probably will if something like this
> passes, particularly if done on a global scale.

There is a way, but it might be costly.   What do you think of this model?

Don't   designate the entire /10 for _anyone_ org use any portion of
at their own will for any purpose;
e.g.  don't tell ISPs to pick some random /24 in the /10  like they
would be allowed with RFC1918
space; indicate they must register,  so every ISP sharing space  has
to first get a registration of some
allocation within the reserved /10,  they have to say how they will
use the space
(why they need shared IPs),  and every different organization is
assigned  from that  big /10
in the same order,  some allocation ranging from  /24 to /20   from
the reserved /10.

And there is no commitment that the entire /10 is reserved or will
always be available for the purpose.
In other words: no user of the shared space picks for themselves which
in the range they will be allowed to use, but it is assigned to each
registrant in an order
that will improve the chances that some of the /10 can be free in the future.

Don't make it a free-for-all like RFC1918. Don't make it a direct
permanent assignment from ARIN
for a purpose;  make it a permanent assignment to a maintainer of this
reserved address space who
will dole it out,  and maintain records + contact info  about who is
using what portion, to applicants in all regions.

Allow ARIN to choose whether an entire /10 is reserved, or a /10
equivalent is reserved.
Require the WHOIS listing to show assignment from ARIN to a  "Shared
IP Registry"   ORG handle.

Possibly allow another actual organization or division to be created,
and require
the outside organization through agreement with ARIN to apply for and
obtain space from this /10,
and administer the space in an appropriate way.

They will be making non globally distinctive assignments;  meaning
every new assignment made will overlap to the extent possible,
with every other assignment (to a different organization), so that at
all times, the minimum amount of the /10  required is  to be used.

Require a return of any shared space no longer needed.
In other words: a  new global IP registry.

I suggest NRPM policy be sorted so that any  "internal use address
space"  [private space] utilized for NAT  cannot be used
to justify global IP allocations,  and should have to be made from the
shared registry instead;  since this address space can be
shared space,  it becomes a waste to provide global allocations for
this private usage.  Any user of NAT444  should
be required to justify  NAT public IPs  for users  based on a formula
that takes into account the reduced requirements for IP address space
that NAT allows.

IOW:  mitigate IP exhaustion by making  the shared space mandatory
for designs  that involve NAT444,
and make it clear a proposed NAT'ed configuration with 60000 users
behind it does not justify a public /16  (for example).

Require a return of any address space no longer justified due to
implementation of NAT, or migration to IPv6 only.

Then the only way the entire /10  for NAT444 private IPs is "locked",
is  if  at least one registrant needs the entire /10 for their

And it only stays that way, while they continue to have that need.

Require ISPs needing any shared space from the /10  to register,  with
that new global IP registry, much like a standard  LIR IP
subdelegation;  with the VERY special stipulation, that the
subdelegation is non-exclusive,  and the addresses
are not to have RDNS service and not to be announced,  there will be
no WHOIS service either.
Only allocate the portion of the /10  that the ISP needs.

Impose an annual fee,  just as with unique globally routable IPs,
based on cost of the "shared registry" existing,
and that could help sustain ARIN as well,  in the face of few new IP
allocations; however with no WHOIS or RDNS
service to maintain,  I would anticipate cost to be minimal  per
registrant.    When all ISPs that registered to use
shared space from the /10  are no longer  registered,  or have
returned their 'shared space' delegations,
the entire /10 can be returned to ARIN.

If  no  ISP requires an entire /10  at any point in time,   portions
of the /10  could then be released in the future.

or If at any time after the end of year 2012, the  'shared GIR'  does
not require at least 80% of the /10, then
the excess portion must be returned to ARIN  for use with future assignments.

If the shared registry require more than a /10,  then they have to
justify it,  with the slight variation that additional address space
requirements are based on the _largest_  necessary subdelegation,
and   cannot be based on an applicant wanting non-overlapping/
non-dulicate assignments.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list