[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2011-5: Shared Transition Space for IPv4 Address Extension - IAB comment

[Joel Jaeggli]

On Jun 27, 2011, at 11:24 PM, Benson Schliesser wrote:

> 
> On Jun 28, 2011, at 0:25, David Kessens <david.kessens at nsn.com> wrote:
> 
>> I believe there is a rather significant difference between your reading of
>> the MoU between the IETF and ICANN and what it actually says:
>> 
>> It doesn't say that the IETF has 'a' role in this matter, it says the IETF
>> is responsible for 'assignment of specialised address blocks'.
> 
> One might argue that the Shared Transition Space isn't "specialized", in that it requires no protocol changes etc; it is merely an unusual administrative assignment. And if there is any purpose for ICANN and the RIRs, it is the administration of community resources. Thus I don't think it's unreasonable for an RIR to exercise mandate in this case. 

It's new private scope v4 address space carved out of ipv4 unicast space. by definition it breaks assumptions that existing hosts and applications make about non-rfc-1918 space.

> On the other hand, this would be a new / unique administrative category, and it would be ideal if the greater community was in consensus. Thus my previous recommendation that we (re)try the IETF, certainly before acting alone.
> 
> Cheers,
> -Benson
> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>