I concur with David's thinking on this... bd
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 12:33 PM, David Farmer <[email protected]> wrote: > Jason, > > I agree with the general intent of what you have written below. However, I > believe the "may begin" was used to allow IANA and the RIRs some > flexibility to do the "right thing" based on the circumstances at the time > when one of the RIRs drops below /9. > > One situation where it might be the right thing to wait, is if one of the > RIRs drops below /9 just before one of the prescribed dates (March 1, or > September 1), like within a month or less. In this circumstance, I think > it would be best to just wait for the next prescribed date, rather than > make the initial disbursement and then make a scheduled disbursement less > than a month later. > > Where as, if one of the prescribed dates has just past, then it makes no > sense to wait the nearly 6 months for the next prescribed date. > > Thanks. > > On 12/4/13, 07:37 , Jason Schiller wrote: > >> It seems fairly clear to me that that the policy instructs IANA to make >> the first allocation immediately upon one RIR dropping below a /9 >> inventory, and there after must wait until the next 6-month window opens >> up for subsequent allocations. >> >> The window serves to allow IANA to collect IPs in its Recovered IPv4 >> Pool, and then have fixed point in time when the amount of IPs is >> totaled and divided. At the time the first RIR drops below a /9, IANA >> will have already had sufficient time to collect IPs. >> >> It also seems obvious to me that, there is a fair bit of complexity in >> describing this behavior and if the authors desired IANA to wait for the >> next 6-month window to open, then this policy text would have been much >> shorter. >> >> If you think this policy suggests the IANA should wait for the next >> 6-month window to open, please speak up. >> >> Thanks, >> >> __Jason >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Jason Schiller <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> I wanted to advise the community, and seek its input on the question >> of when IANA should make its first allocation from the Recovered >> IPv4 Pool. >> >> It seems some read the global policy and conclude that the Recovered >> IPv4 Pool becomes active immediately after one RIR dipping below a >> /9 of inventory and IANA should straight away >> make an allocation and then make its next allocation after crossing >> the next 6-month period starting on March 1st or September 1st. >> >> It seems some read the global policy and conclude that the IANA >> should make its first allocation from the after crossing the next >> 6-month period starting on March 1st or September 1st after one RIR >> dipping below a /9 of inventory. >> >> In short should IANA make an allocation after one RIR dipping below >> a /9 of inventory or should it wait until the next 6-month period >> opens up? >> >> Below is the email we have received regarding this question: >> >> Dear Louie, >>> >>> As you chair the ASO AC, I am seeking your guidance on the >>> interpretation of the Global Policy for Post Exhaustion IPv4 >>> Allocation >>> Mechanisms by the IANA, which was ratified in May 2012. >>> >>> The global policy defines states that "Allocations from the IANA may >>> begin once the pool is declared active." It is not clear whether this >>> means that allocation from the Recovered IPv4 Pool should be made >>> straight away or whether they should happen at the start of the next >>> "IPv4 allocation period," the "6-month period following 1 March or 1 >>> September." >>> >>> We hope you can advise us on the intended meaning of this sentence, >>> so >>> that we can implement the policy appropriately. >>> >>> We look forward to receiving your response on this question of >>> interpretation of the Global Policy for Post Exhaustion IPv4 >>> Allocation >>> Mechanisms by the IANA. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Leo Vegoda >>> ICANN >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> _______________________________________________________ >> Jason Schiller|NetOps|[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>|571-266-0006 <tel:571-266-0006> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> _______________________________________________________ >> Jason Schiller|NetOps|[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>|571-266-0006 >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. >> >> > > -- > ================================================ > David Farmer Email: [email protected] > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815 > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952 > ================================================ > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. >
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
