On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:26 AM, ARIN <[email protected]> wrote: > On 24 January 2014 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted "ARIN-prop-195 > Remove 8.2 and 8.3 and 8.4 Minimum IPv4 Block Size Requirements" as a Draft > Policy. >
I oppose prop 195 as written, because (1) it is unnecessary. (2) This is yet another IPv4-focused policy. At this point, ARIN should be essentially looking at IPv6 policies policies only, and not make changes that could adversly further affect IPv4 runout in problematic ways. (3) Free pools are not yet exhausted, so interest in 8.3 transfers cannot yet be regarded or observed in any terms --- let alone to show that "available /24s and longer" are inadequate, (4) IPv6 is likely to be adopted more heavily, obviating the usefulness of any attempts to increase the number of resource transfers occuring. (5) Prefixes of /24 and larger will most likely be available over specified transfer, and (4) Allowing attempts to fragment /24s in IPv4 do not significantly delay exhaustion of IPv4, but instead is a potential source of a great deal of pain. (6) Disagree with "allowing networks to move blocks around as they see fit". The manner "in which some networks see fit" is not necessarily a good thing for the level of global routing table bloat. (7) A problem is: as long as routes for these prefixes would hypothetically be accepted, the networks who "see fit to move smaller blocks around and fragment /24s into small chunks to sell off IP by IP" are not bearing the cost of their actions --- other ARIN members would be essentially forced to bear costs. Ultimately resulting in greater unpredictability, whether a prefix received by allocation or transfer could successfully be routed globally. Lack of a minimum would potentially see some networks splitting off large numbers of "surplus" /25 or /26 prefixes, and some small networks accreting 3 or 4 of these transfer blocks over a small timeframe, rather than a slightly higher costing /24; thereby, increasing global routing table fragmentation. (8) And I would say that at this point, the /24 minimum is not an arbitrary minimum. By de-facto standard, no longer prefix is permissible to be announced. > > Policy statement: > Remove all instances in 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 which set a minimum transfer > size of a /24. > -- -JH
_______________________________________________ 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.
