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

George Herbert george.herbert at gmail.com
Mon Jun 27 18:25:30 EDT 2011

On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 3:03 PM, Alain Durand <adurand at juniper.net> wrote:
>>>> The IAB believes that the adoption by ARIN would be in conflict with the
>>>> provisions in RFC2860 and would set a bad precedent: Setting aside
>>>> special addresses should be done within the existing process, i.e. by
>>>> the IETF.
>> In light of the IAB's objection, it seems to me that the ARIN board
>> has four options to consider:
>> 1. Submit an internet draft as the IAB requests, along with the
>> implications of doing so.
>> 2. Implement 2011-5  as recommended by the AC and community, and over
>> the IAB's objection.
>> 3. Abandon 2011-5. Proponents may make their case to the IETF.
>> 4. Implement 2011-5 as a temporary stopgap policy pending further IETF action.
> In their response, the IAB clearly states that 2011-5 creates address space that modifies the IP addressing architecture. This should not be done by RIRs. Period.
> As such, I believe ARIN should abandon 2011-5 all together. Trying to stick it under the rug is a bad idea. If some wants to do that in the privacy of their networks, this is one thing,
> ARIN doing it is another. That would set a very bad precedent that other SDO could follow to claim they can update IETF protocols on their own. Note: this is already happening with MPLS-TP,
> for those who follow that discussion.

If the need is urgent enough, the operators may be forced to override
the policy cries of "Unclean!  Unclean!" and simply do it.

If the easiest way to do that is for ARIN to allocate the block to a
consortium with a wink wink nudge nudge, and simultaneously for
someone to go to IETF to legitimize the consortium's action, then that
seems reasonably harmless...

-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list