[arin-ppml] Solving the squatting problem
farmer at umn.edu
Fri May 17 00:29:54 EDT 2019
On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 21:54 Michel Py <michel at arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us>
> > David Farmer wrote :
> Do you have a better suggestion ? The squatting issue is new, what does
> ARIN do about it ?
Do you think squatting is something new? You have got to be joking! Read
RFC 1627, particularly near the bottom of page 3.
Furthermore, it is my understanding that RFC1597 and then RFC1918 simply
codified a fairly common practice of squatting on the 10 net after the
decommissioning of the ARPANet in 1989 anyway.
> > Nevertheless, there is no way for ARIN to unilaterally allocate 240/4
> for any purpose.
> I beg to disagree. It could be an experimental purpose. Sounds like the
> product of buffalo rumination, but policy is sometimes about untold nuances.
RFC1112, Section 4 clearly "reserves" the Class E space, 240/4, this is
further documented in the IANA IPv4 Special-Purpose Address Registry.
RFC2860 defines the relationship between IANA, the IETF, and the IESG. RFC
7020 defines the Internet Registry System and the relationship between the
IANA and the RIRs. RFC7249 Section 2.2 clearly gives the responsibility of
the "non-reserved" IPv4 space to the Internet Registry System for "allocation
and registration functions," but 240/4 is reserved.
ARIN has a policy for experimental allocation of resources under its
authority but it prefers work sanctioned by the IETF and 240/4 isn't under
ARIN's authority per the above.
Tilt at your windmills all you want, but to make it happen either go to the
IETF or we could try a global policy needing the consensus of all 5 RIRs,
requesting the IANA and the IETF to allocate 240/4 for Private Use, and as
I said I think it would be difficult for the IETF to ignore such a request
backed by the consensus of the global Internet Registry System. But, the
devil is getting that consensus for this.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML