Re: [sig-policy] The status of APNIC's IPv4 resources

...Skeeve

Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker

v4Now - an eintellego Networks service

skeeve at v4now dot com ; www.v4now.com

Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve

facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve

twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve

IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:07 AM, George Kuo <george at apnic dot net> wrote:

Hi Owen,

On 15/09/2015 3:36 am, Owen DeLong wrote:

On Sep 14, 2015, at 01:59 , Masato Yamanishi <myamanis at gmail dot com
<mailto:myamanis at gmail dot com>> wrote:

Dear Colleagues,

In Jakarta, Geoff Huston presented the status of our IPv4 resources,
in particular about exhaustion and transfer,
and some participants asked to summarize and post it to the list for
further discussion.

Following is Chairs' summary of the presentation and discussion.

1. Status of APNIC Final /8 pool (103/8)
- Will run out ~4-5 years

I think this is an appropriate time frame for runout of this pool as it
will be at least that long before new entrants are not in need of some
way to communicate with the legacy IPv4 internet.

2. Status of IANA Recovered pool (non-103)
- Will run out in next 7 months+
- IANA may allocate additional space in every 6 months
- This pool will repeatedly ‘run-out’ as IANA delegates more space
and it is distributed by APNIC
- May need policy to deal with temporary exhaustion of the non-103 pool
-> Close the door when exhausted or create the waiting list and
put further applications to there?

I really don’t care what we do here. What would be the default action if
no policy change is enacted? Can we get clarification from staff on that?
Absent that being a particularly bad outcome (unlikely), I say let’s not
focus on rearranging the IPv4 deck chairs any further.

There is no policy which addresses this issue however APNIC staff have discussed this and propose the following approach:

When requests from this pool are approved but cannot be fulfilled they will be added to a waitlist. When additional resources are added to the pool, they will be allocated to wait-listed requests (in order) until the pool is consumed or the waitlist is cleared. We will continue in this way until there is a policy which directs otherwise.

We believe this is fairer than rejecting requests which cannot be fulfilled, and then having to deal with a flood of new requests when we announce availability of additional resources (in particular because the timing of that announcement will strongly influence who can take advantage of it).

Feedback and discussion on this approach would be welcome of course.

Thanks.

George

3. Some address spaces in 103/8 were transferred within 12months since
initial allocation
- There is no policy to prohibit it while the Secretariat asks in
review process

Closing the door after the horses have left the barn is likely
pointless. The community specifically chose to exclude this concern from
the transfer policy during its development (it’s not like it was not
discussed), so I say let’s spend this energy getting IPv6 deployed
rather than rearranging the IPv4 deck chairs any further.

Owen

* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy

* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy