Re: [sig-policy] prop-086: Global policy for IPv4 allocations by the IAN
> Hi Leo,
> Thanks for jumping in so quickly with your reply. :-)
Yes, thank so much, Leo!
> Leo Vegoda said the following on 17/08/10 03:54 :
> > I can't speak for the authors but I can describe what we
> > "have in stock" and what the ratified policies allows
> > us to do. The only IPv4 address blocks we have with an
> > UNALLOCATED status are whole /8s. Further, the current policy
> > we implement only allows us to allocate /8s:
> > " * The IANA will allocate IPv4 address
> > space to the RIRs in /8 units." --
> > http://www.icann.org/en/general/allocation-IPv4-rirs.html
> Yes, I saw that, but so far I've been interpreting a /8 unit
> as address space amounting to a /8, not a whole contiguous
> piece. Hmm, a unit is not lots of little pieces, is it. :-(
> Perhaps it should have said contiguous rather than unit. Oh
I suppose that an organization will attempt to return enough
address space amounting to a /8 but is not contiguous in any way
whether it falls on the /8 bit boundary or not. (Technically,
contiguous doesn't imply falling on the bit boundary, but it can
for the purposes of this discussion.)
This is probably unlikely to happen in the timeframe prior to
IANA exhaustion at this point. But the policy proposal will
be able to handle that issue once that point has been reached.
> Do you/we need a policy proposal to allow IANA to allocate
> smaller pieces to the RIRs?
In another response, I indicated that we feel if there is any
free space held by the IANA at all, it should be given to any
RIR that has exhausted its supply so that the address get used.
One of the authors of prop-086