[sig-policy] Summary of discussion: prop-86
Hash: SHA1
_______________________________________________________________________
prop-086: Global policy for IPv4 allocations by the IANA post exhaustion
_______________________________________________________________________
Dear SIG members
Below is a summary of discussions on the proposal to date. We encourage
you to continue discussions on the mailing list before the Policy
SIG.
Regards,
Gaurab, Ching-Heng, and Terence
Proposal summary
- ----------------
With the depletion of the IANA free pool of IPv4 address space, the
current policy regarding the allocation of IPv4 address space to the
RIRs will become moot. The RIRs may, according to their individual
policies and procedures, recover IPv4 address space. This policy
provides a mechanism for the RIRs to retro allocate the recovered IPv4
address space to the IANA and provides the IANA the policy by which it
can allocate it back to the RIRs on a needs basis. This policy creates a
new global pool of IPv4 address space that can be allocated where it is
needed on a global basis without a transfer of address space between the
RIRs.
This policy proposal addresses the issues raised with the previous
policy proposal prop-069, which the authors agree will not gain global
consensus without significant revision.
Discussion statistics
- ---------------------
Version 1 posted to Policy SIG mailing list: 23 July 2010
Version 2 posted to Policy SIG mailing list: 23 December 2010
Version 3 posted to Policy SIG mailing list: 18 February 2011
Number of posts since proposal first posted: 52
Number of people participating in discussions: 11
Summary of discussion to date
- -----------------------------
- The question was asked if this proposal was intended to create a
framework to allow allocation by IANA rather than expecting
this would actually occur, since the return of address space to
IANA is not mandatory.
- The question was asked of section 5.3 which says "The Reclamation
Pool will be divided on CIDR boundaries and distributed evenly to
all eligible RIRs"? A suggested interpretation was that the
"Reclamation Pool" would only be a potential pool unless one of
the RIRs found it no longer needed the IPv4 address space they
were recovering.
- There were questions about the need for such a policy since
deployment of IPv6 is the objective
- There was concern over the meaning of the phrase "Longest minimum
allocation"
- It was asked whether each time an RIR receives and allocation
whether each other RIR would also receive one, because the
proposal says “distributed evenly to all eligible RIRs”
- A concern was raised that APNIC’s runout policy (Final /8) would
mean that it will start stockpiling extra address space.
- There was a call for a separate proposal covering transfers.
- There was discussion around whether this proposal favors North
America with one stakeholder pointing out that not having a
proposal like this could favor North America region the most.
- A question was asked whether if the RIRs cannot agree on this
issue, would it be possible to create a reclamation pool at IANA
for which LIRs can go directly. This would require RIRs to forego
their traditional responsibility and for IANA to hire staff, or
outsource the function.
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-086
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk1jfP8ACgkQSo7fU26F3X2fkACg9jsrOwIvpNFCd9LaXKlYTUaq
aYsAn1KT5W+GBYQZAF0F3tfBQUIdYX+S
=z6sf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----