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

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Mon Jul 4 14:37:35 EDT 2011

On Jul 4, 2011, at 8:14 PM, William Herrin wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 12:20 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>> On Jul 4, 2011, at 12:26 PM, William Herrin wrote:
>>> Yes, I understand your interpretation of the matter. You recommend we
>>> punt back to the IETF and let them run with the ball for a while. And
>>> if someone else would like to write a proposal that ARIN play lap dog
>>> to the IETF on prop 2011-5, I'm sure I can find it within myself not
>>> to invent process grounds for objecting.
>> Bill - RFC2860 indicates that the IETF should establish the criteria
>> and procedures for a reservation of the type proposed in Draft Policy
>> 2011-5.
> John,
> Prop 154 indicates the same. That's what makes it different from
> 2011-5. But 154 also facilitates ARIN constituents' operation for the
> three years it's going to take the IETF to work through the
> procedures.

ARIN-prop-154 directs ARIN to perform that allocation, whereas RFC 2860
indicates that should be performed by the IANA in accordance with the 
criteria and procedures established by the IETF.

> This community has argued for years as to exactly what we should do
> with the endgame IPv4 addresses. We've finally reached a strong
> consensus on how to use those addresses to keep IPv4 limping along
> while we wait for IPv6 ubiquity. Do you honestly believe that in a
> million years the authors of RFC 2860 intended to sabotage, delay or
> play turf wars with that effort?

Whether that type of allocation is technically advisable is 
the domain of the IETF, at least according to RFC 2860 and 
the guidance we just received by the IAB.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list