[arin-ppml] Bootstrapping new entrants after IPv4 exhaustion

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Mon Nov 25 18:10:38 EST 2013


As I have repeatedly stated. I am opposed to bifurcating the qualifications for space from ARIN vs. space from transfers.

Making transfers more liberal that direct allocations/assignments is already proving harmful and I don’t believe it is good policy 
to expand that dichotomy.

Owen

On Nov 25, 2013, at 10:57 AM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:

> Owen,
> 
> I agree with you that we need to avoid the deadly embrace: that is the main reason for proposing this, so we're in full agreement there.
> 
> I'm not sure that it would be a good idea, though, to let any organization, not matter how small, get an IPv4 /24 from ARIN's free pool without any real restrictions.  I am much more comfortable allowing an organization to get such a /24 via transfer, where they have to have at least enough need for the space to justify spending the money for it.
> 
> In any event, I wonder if we should first focus on the less controversial fix, and make sure that anyone who can justify the need for a /24 or larger can get it somehow or other, and separately look into the possibility of portable space for organizations needing less than a /24.
> 
> -Scott
> 
> 
> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 10:02 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> Frankly, I don’t think blocking off existing players from getting space they need in order to save space for possible future entrants is good policy.
> 
> I do think we need to make sure that we avoid deadly embrace in the transfer market where new players can’t even get a transfer simply because they can’t get upstream space or meet some other prior-space requirement before being able to seek out space in the transfer market.
> 
> However, I also think it is bad policy to make those policies any more liberal for transfers than they are for what is left of the ARIN free pool.
> 
> Hence, I support something like what Scott has posted, but I believe it is necessary to remove the “transfer only” clause from it.
> 
> Owen
> 
> On Nov 24, 2013, at 4:18 PM, Bill Darte <billdarte at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> New entrants cannot hope to compete in a long term strategy with only limited amounts of v4.  So they will have to go to the transfer market if they need more.  Isn't the transfer market about enabling people who 'really want or need' v4 that opportunity.  But, I agree that having some v4 for start ups is probably still a requirement for now, so I would consider a single small block.....still, if v6 deployment is delayed longer than we hope, then the v4 for new entrants may still run out.  What do we do for those folks.....  We cannot continue to move the deck chairs to forestall the move to v6 forever....
>> 
>> bd
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 4:58 PM, CJ Aronson <cja at daydream.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, but it limits that use to strictly transitional technology deployment, not general IPv4 utilization.
>> 
>> 
>> I think this is something we should be discussing.  Right now the only post run out policy ARIN has is for the last /10.  You  can get a block (very small) out of this for transition technologies only.  There is no provision for new entrants except the transfer market in the ARIN region.  
>> 
>> So some of us, and Scott started the discussion going, want to clean up the policy manual so that it makes sense for ARIN post run out.  We could also make a policy like in the other regions that gives a specific size block to everyone (or maybe just new entrants?) out of some of the last space.  If we are going to add the second option then time is really short.  
>> 
>> we made the final /10 policy a very long time ago and maybe not everyone realizes it is just for transition? Do people still think this makes sense?  
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> ----Cathy
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20131125/58172935/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list