Hi Karl, Just throwing it out there. My personal opinion is that the v6 deployment /10 is a failure and an economic limiter for new entrants and could be rethought.
Best, -M< > On Oct 20, 2015, at 20:12, Karl Brumund <[email protected]> wrote: > > Martin, > I'm unsure what the problem is that you're trying to solve. I'm guessing it's > `let anybody new get a /24` so they have a chance for some v4 space. Or maybe > its have ARIN be the same as other regions (though I'd say the transfer > process is a bigger fish for that). > You mentioned 'reasonable and fair'. Could you elaborate a bit, as I think > I'm not caffinated enough to follow. > > Thanks! > ...karl > > >> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Martin Hannigan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> That was 2014. It is now near 2016. Then, we were not exhausted. Now, we >> are. >> >> Here's the RIPE policy bits >> >> https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-649 >> >> Here's the ARIN policy: >> >> https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html (Section 4.10) >> >> A brief summary. >> >> The RIPE policy is liberal in that every LIR (new or old) gets a /22. The >> ARIN policy is restrictive and digs into the same old noise around needs and >> transfer. >> >> We _could_ narrow this to new entrants (which does pose an antitrust >> question). >> >> We _could_ also direct that incoming IANA bits be redirected to new entrants >> as well up to the equivalent of a /8 to be parallel to other regions, but >> I'm not sure we need a limit although. >> >> We _could_ limit the size of the allocation to no longer shorter than a /24. >> >> >> Best, >> >> -M< >> >> >>> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Andrew Dul <[email protected]> wrote: >>> The ARIN community previously considered these ideas under 2014-16, but >>> changing the /10 to something other than transition never had sufficient >>> support for the AC to move it forward. >>> >>> https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2014_16.html >>> >>> .Andrew >>> >>>> On Oct 20, 2015, at 5:35 PM, Morizot Timothy S <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks for the clarifications. In that context, assuming a new entrant is >>>> deploying IPv6, wouldn't the current policy allow them to request >>>> allocations to support that deployment. It specifically mentions needs >>>> like dual-stacked nameservers and various IPv4 life extension solutions. >>>> If a new entrant *isn't* deploying IPv6 from the start, do we really want >>>> to support them with a free pool allocation? For any needs beyond those >>>> described in the policy, there's the transfer market. I don't know that I >>>> have particularly strong feelings either way, but if we're going to >>>> reserve any general use pool at all rather than simply handing it all out >>>> to meet current need, I think it's better to tie it to demonstrated IPv6 >>>> deployment. >>>> >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >>>> Behalf Of Spears, Christopher M. >>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 10:21 AM >>>> To: Hadenfeldt, Andrew C >>>> Cc: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Transition /10 >>>> >>>> NRPM 4.10 [1] dedicated /10 for IPv6 "transition".. >>>> >>>> I tossed a similar idea around with some folks at ARIN36. Use this /10 >>>> to allocate a /24 per **new** Org, and steer subsequent transactions to >>>> transfers. That would ensure IPv4 for ~16K **new** entrants in the >>>> coming years.. >>>> >>>> [1] https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four10 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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.
_______________________________________________ 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.
