[arin-ppml] 4.10 transition/deployment /10 Was: Re: Transition /10

Martin Hannigan hannigan at gmail.com
Wed Oct 21 08:27:59 EDT 2015

Renamed to be more specific.

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:01 AM, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:

> I think Section 4.10 (2008-5) is working as planed.
> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2008_5.html
> The IPv4 free pool is now out and we still have a /10 for those that need
> some IPv4 for IPv6 deployments.  At least that much is a success. We would
> be far worse off without the /10.

> Our community couldn't agree on reserving the whole last /8 like some of
> other RIRs did.  A /10 isn't enough for the same kind of last /8 policy
> that the other RIRs have, that is everyone gets a /22 or something like
> that.  It's really too late to change that now.

It's not, but the prefix size could be (unfortunately) reduce to accomplish
much of the same except not at the same scale in terms of utility.

> However, we need to think hard about the current policy and if the details
> are correct now that the IPv4 free pool is gone and we actually need to
> make use of it.  I would love to hear experiences using and/or suggestions
> to improve section 4.10.  But, with only a /10 I'm going to be very leery
> of suggestions for use of the 4.10 reservation that are not directly tied
> to IPv6 deployment requirements.
Well, there's at least 2 x use. :)

> If you want IPv4 for IPv4 sake there are transfers and the waiting list,
> and the waiting list isn't a reliable source of addresses, so that really
> only leaves transfers.
>> <hannigan at gmail.com>

I'm well aware of how to get v4 addresses, but thanks. Watching the debate
over the RIPE last /8 policy, it simple convinced me we were _wrong_.  And
having networks go to RIPE for their last v4 allocation seems to be at odds
with "out of region" use, which in itself is of questionable utility. The
RIPE region could adjust their policies accordingly, but they seemed to
have gotten it mostly right. Making new entry into the market easy-peasy
without technical restrictions other than you need to use it seems more
reasonable that what we have. The impact to v6 deployment overall is
probably zero. And finally, it at least addresses the inequity that new
entrants will have with those of us who are policy expects and know how to
use the secret decoder ring e.g. "assigned" "provisioned" "get a new ORG
ID" etc.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20151021/e2ebb126/attachment.html>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list