Re: [sig-policy] prop-086: Global policy for IPv4 allocations by the IAN
> On Aug 26, 2010, at 5:53 PM, Philip Smith wrote:
>> I agree with the sentiment expressed by several folks yesterday. We (the
>> community) need to work out a way of making prop-069 (as it was here)
>> fly in the ARIN region. It was approved in the other 4 RIR regions.
> Prop-069 had two aspects: establishing an IANA pool for returned space,
> and making return of space to the IANA mandatory. It's possible for all
> of the RIRs to agree on the former point without "meddling" in each others
> policy, it does not appear possible to reconcile on the latter point at
> this time.
> i.e. If mandatory return is a requirement in any region, then one would
> expect prop-086 (which lacks such in my reading) to suffer a similar fate
> as prop-069.
As one of the contributers/co-authors of prop-086, I would like to try
to add some clarity to this discussion which may (or may not) be
lacking. John's reading is correct, prop-086 has no requirement for
mandatory return of space to IANA.
When developing this proposal, we too saw prop-069 as having two
1) Creating a pool in IANA for returned space and creating a method by
which IANA could distribute that space (and any other space not
covered by current IANA policy, namely the fragments).
2) Mandating the unconditional return of all space recovered in any
region to IANA for distribution by the method created in provision #1.
Because we felt that provision #1 was vitally important and we saw
that provision #2 had stopped the entire prop from being adopted in
the ARIN region, we decided to create a proposal to address provision
#1 (facilitate the return and re-distribution of IPv4 address space
through the IANA) independently. Prop-086 is what we came up with. I
do not believe that putting this proposal forward precludes anyone
from submitting a subsequent global proposal to address provision #2
from prop-069 (in fact it may facilitate it).
With all of that in mind (apologies if it is a repeat of common
knowledge) I ask the APNIC community to consider that if the world
believed that this idea was a valid and necessary one as half of
prop-069 then it is still/also a valid and necessary proposal on it's
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net