[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-154 Shared Space for IPv4 Address Extension (w/IETF considerations) - Staff Comments

[Owen DeLong]

On Jul 2, 2011, at 1:04 AM, John Curran wrote:

> On Jul 2, 2011, at 9:16 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> 
>> Respectfully, John, as things stand at this moment, I disagree. I believe that
>> proposal 154 calls for ARIN to designate and set aside the specific /10.
>> While the board may be intending to do so, it is not clear that draft policy
>> 2011-5 requires that to be done and until the board actually makes such an
>> announcement, proposal 154 remains non-duplicative and relevant as
>> a policy proposal.
> 
> Owen - 
> 
>  Upon adoption, Draft Policy 2011-5 requires that a contiguous /10 IPv4  
>  block be reserved for this purpose.
> 
Since the board has not yet ratified and I haven't received any indication that
would cause me to believe that the board will ratify 2011-5 in the absence
of IAB approval to do so.

>  If adopted, ARIN-prop-154 would also require that a contiguous /10 IPv4  
>  block be reserved for this purpose.
> 

But 154 requires a set-aside of the space regardless of whether the IAB
approves using it for that purpose or not. It provides for the public to know
what block was set aside, though ARIN is instructed to discourage its use
prior to IAB/IESG/IETF approval.

>  If 2011-5 hadn't been recommended to the ARIN Board of Trustees, then I
>  could see the ARIN AC accepting ARIN-prop-154 on the docket and merging
>  it with the draft policy. (I would at that time advise against language
>  not germane to Internet number resource management of the address block,
>  but that's another issue)
> 
Since you bring it up, care to specify which language you consider not
germane to number resource policy?

>  As it is, with 2011-5 recommended for adoption, the ARIN AC has given the
>  question to the ARIN Board of Trustees.  Since the question also deals 
>  with issues such as how we respect existing relationships with other 
>  organizations while still meeting the needs of the community, it is 
>  actually quite appropriate that the ARIN Board deliberate on the matter.
> 

I believe that proposal 154 addresses some of those issues in a more direct
and head-on manner and if it receives community consensus (there does
appear to be strong support so far), that would send a rather clear message
to the board about the desires of the community.

I agree that it is appropriate for the board to deliberate the manner. I also feel
that it is appropriate for the community to take further action to express their
desires to the board and to insure that options are not overtaken by events
while the board engages in said deliberation.

>> As such, I would recommend that the AC put 154 on the docket at their
>> next meeting and consider it in scope until such time as the board actually
>> takes and announces action that would obviate the need for 154. If that
>> happens, then, I would support abandoning 154 at that time as it would
>> then be out of scope.
> 
>  You are free to recommend any course of action as you see fit.
> 

Yep... I was aware of that, but, thanks for the confirmation.

Owen