Re: [sig-policy] prop-081: Eligibility for assignments from the final /8
> Andy,
>
> Prop-081 doesn't in any way violate the concept of
> give everyone a single small block of IPv4 from the final /8,
> It's just that under current final /8 policy it's impossible
> to make IPv4 addresses assignments to end users,
> we propose that change in order to makes it consistent in
> dealing with allocation and assignment in the final /8 phase.
>
> Current IPv4 policy permit assignments as well as allocations,
> I don't see any extra administrative work load will be incurred
> if we keep that consistence in the final /8 phase.
> I also don't think we should exclude assignments in the
> final /8 phase in order to reduce administrative work load.
Terence,
I understand the distinction you're trying to make here between
allocation and assignment. I believe that what we agreed under the
existing final /8 policy was that any member asking for resources would
get one /22 (assuming the current minimum allocation size remains as it
is) and that would be it. No more requests, finished, over...
When we get to the final /8 the game changes and we need to recognize
that. As that final /22 will be all the IPv4 space each member will get
from APNIC if they want to use part of it for IXPs, critical
infrastructure etc then that's their call.
At the moment there are a number of policy initiatives trying to deal
with micro management of the final /8. My feeling is that we should try
to have a very simple set of policies that reinforce the need to start
adopting IPv6 as soon as possible.
I believe that the current /8 policy with a single /22 for each
applicant coupled with additional space from the IPv6 transition /10
that we currently have is a pretty reasonable situation and that
additional tweaking of the policies will simply serve to confuse
applicants. It's natural for us to want to do something here but
differentiating between allocations and assignments will at best make a
difference of a few days or weeks to the final exhaustion date.
The message they need to start hearing now is that when we get to the
final /8, IPv4 addresses are effectively exhausted and they need to get
on with IPv6.
That's why I'm not in favour of this proposal.
andy