Re: [sig-policy] prop-055-v001: Global policy for the allocation of the
Randy Bush said the following on 23/1/08 17:58:
2. Summary of current problem
------------------------------
<snip>
For example, in a region where late comers desperately need even small
blocks of IPv4 addresses to access to the IPv4 Internet, a policy that
defines the target of allocations/assignments of IPv4 address space to
be late comers would be appropriate in such region. This would allow
availablilty of IPv4 address space for such requirements for more years.
Please provide a reference to this policy in the APNIC region? I can't
find one, and I really hope we aren't waiting for some kind soul to
propose something? Yet again we are putting the cart in front of the
horse, I fear.
Worst case, we may never see a policy or even a proposal which attempts
to address the above, in which case the final "special" APNIC /8 will be
depleted through the normal process. And I'm sure the authors do not
want all their hard work to go to waste because of this.
4. Details of the proposal
----------------------------
<snip>
In order to fulfill the requirements of this policy, at the time it is
adopted, one /8 will be reserved by IANA for each RIR. The reserved
allocation units will no longer be part of the available space at the
IANA pool. IANA will also reserve one /8 to any new RIR at the time it
is recognized.
Ummm, so when will IANA be reserving these /8s? Immediately the proposal
is successful in all RIR regions? So how will they know which new RIRs
(are there any in the works?) to reserve a /8 for. What happens if a new
RIR is formed at a later date - do they automatically get a /8 out of
the remaining pool? And what happens if one is formed after the final /8
has gone? Would it be fair to say to them "too bad, the consensus
process to form your RIR was too slow"...? Why should they be disadvantaged?
5. Advantages and disadvantages of the proposal
-------------------------------------------------
Advantages:
- It allows each RIR community to define a policy on how to distribute
the last piece(s) of allocations which best matches their situation.
Does it? What is stopping any RIR community defining the policy right
now for any /8 the RIR has? I'm not aware of any impediment, apart from
someone to write the proposal. Maybe the authors representing each RIR
region could pen something appropriate? As I said above, would be a
shame for all their hard work to be wasted.
Disadvantages:
<snip>
- Concerns could be raised that explicitly allowing regional policies
will encourage RIR shopping. However, this should not happen if the
requirements within each region is adequately reflected in each RIR's
policy through PDP. RIR may also chose to add criteria to prevent
LIRs from other regions submitting such requests.
Again, not all RIRs have policies explicitly restricting resource
allocations to organisations/LIRs who originate within the RIR region.
In fact, do any have this restriction?
7. Effect on NIRs
-------------------
The effect on APNIC members applies to members of NIRs. NIRs are
therefore expected to inform their communities of the situation.
Just an aside, nothing to do with this proposal... I'm curious why this
policy will affect the NIRs, yet the IPv4 address transfer policy
prop-050-v002 has been deemed not to apply to them. Maybe someone can
explain this one. I'm not aware of anything in the APNIC policy process
which allows policy shopping by APNIC membership.
philip
--