[sig-policy] Summary of discussion: prop-91
Hash: SHA1
_______________________________________________________________________
prop-091: Limiting of final /8 policy to specific /9
_______________________________________________________________________
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
- ----------------
This is a proposal to modify the policies for distribution of the "final
/8" to only apply to a specific /9 block of the final /8, on the basis
that the current policies would unnecessarily prevent the use of over 8
million IPv4 addresses that otherwise should be used to enable user
connections.
Discussion statistics
- ---------------------
Version 1 posted to Policy SIG mailing list: 20 January 2011
Number of posts since proposal first posted: 47
Number of people participating in discussions: 16
Summary of discussion to date
- -----------------------------
- There was a suggestion that this is a form of hoarding, which was
refuted as the resources were to be held in 'public trust'
- One commentator suggested there were two opposing camps
discussing this issue. The first believes that if there are
address available they should be distributed, the other which
says these should be reserved for "new APNIC members" and that
the restriction will kickstart IPv6 adoption.
- One person warned that this approach might just result in the
community coming back in six months and reducing the reserved
space even further. It was suggested that a regular review of the
resources may be appropriate anyway.
- An alternative approach to avoid under-utilization of the
unallocated space was suggested. The final allocation could be
increased to a /21 instead of /22.
- There was a general discussion about issues about proper
distribution of the /9, and warnings that a large amount of
unallocated resources could encourage bad behavior.
- There was also the suggestion that extending IPv4 distribution
any longer gives people false hope of staying with IPv4 rather
than moving to IPv6.
http://www.apnic.net/policy/proposals/prop-091
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk1jfX4ACgkQSo7fU26F3X2oSwCbB9zNcu8yclWwveZVjn6IXDvY
XFsAoIbfM9ZZIjOM/884f/A9KU1ongE5
=s8JN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----