Renamed to be more specific.
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:01 AM, David Farmer <[email protected]> wrote: > I think Section 4.10 (2008-5) is working as planed. > > https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2008_5.html > > The IPv4 free pool is now out and we still have a /10 for those that need > some IPv4 for IPv6 deployments. At least that much is a success. We would > be far worse off without the /10. > Our community couldn't agree on reserving the whole last /8 like some of > other RIRs did. A /10 isn't enough for the same kind of last /8 policy > that the other RIRs have, that is everyone gets a /22 or something like > that. It's really too late to change that now. > It's not, but the prefix size could be (unfortunately) reduce to accomplish much of the same except not at the same scale in terms of utility. > > However, we need to think hard about the current policy and if the details > are correct now that the IPv4 free pool is gone and we actually need to > make use of it. I would love to hear experiences using and/or suggestions > to improve section 4.10. But, with only a /10 I'm going to be very leery > of suggestions for use of the 4.10 reservation that are not directly tied > to IPv6 deployment requirements. > > Well, there's at least 2 x use. :) > If you want IPv4 for IPv4 sake there are transfers and the waiting list, > and the waiting list isn't a reliable source of addresses, so that really > only leaves transfers. > >> <[email protected]> > > I'm well aware of how to get v4 addresses, but thanks. Watching the debate over the RIPE last /8 policy, it simple convinced me we were _wrong_. And having networks go to RIPE for their last v4 allocation seems to be at odds with "out of region" use, which in itself is of questionable utility. The RIPE region could adjust their policies accordingly, but they seemed to have gotten it mostly right. Making new entry into the market easy-peasy without technical restrictions other than you need to use it seems more reasonable that what we have. The impact to v6 deployment overall is probably zero. And finally, it at least addresses the inequity that new entrants will have with those of us who are policy expects and know how to use the secret decoder ring e.g. "assigned" "provisioned" "get a new ORG ID" etc. Best, -M<
_______________________________________________ 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.
