Thank you for the continued input on this draft policy proposal.

I will be updating the text of the draft policy to include both 4.4 and 4.10 
pools.  Point of information, the 4.4 pool currently has approximately 391 
/24’s and 4.10 has approximately 15,753 /24’s available and are not estimated 
to run out in the next five years.

Please keep your feedback coming, it is very helpful for the council.

-Alison

From: ARIN-PPML [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On Behalf Of Fernando 
Frediani
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 6:44 AM
To: arin-ppml <arin-ppml@arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-17: Returned Addresses to the 
4.10 Reserved Pool


The point is that you treating IP marketing as something 'natural' or a 
'default route' which it is not and can never be. Natural is to receive some 
addresses from the RIR in first place so they are treated as anyone else was in 
the past and have a chance to exist in the Internet with same conditions as all 
others. From that if they need extra space then fine to seek for alternative 
ways.

I don't think a new entrants would automatically qualify for 4.10 in all cases 
therefore any space left should be targeted also to them as well to IPv6 
transition and critical infrastructure. Otherwise the community will be 
creating an artificial barrier to them in order to favor the IP market while 
the RIR still has IPv4 space available for them.

Fernando
On 30/07/2019 10:30, Tom Fantacone wrote:
I would think that the majority of new entrants would need at least some 
allocation to help with IPv6 transition and would qualify for addresses from 
the 4.10 pool.  Depending on what they receive from that pool and when, they 
may not qualify for additional waiting list addresses and would have to go to 
the transfer market for additional IPv4 space anyway.  Those that don't qualify 
under 4.10 can still get smaller IPv4 blocks on the transfer market readily, 
and the cost for blocks in the /24-/22 range is not prohibitive.  Certainly an 
organization seeking a small IPv4 block for multi-homing or other purposes is 
better off spending a few thousand dollars to purchase a range than waiting a 
year on the waiting list to put their plans in motion.

Note that while RIPE does not have a reserve pool specifically for IPv6 
transition, the expectation of their final /8 policy was to allow new entrants 
access to IPv4 to assist in this transition.  In reality, it didn't work out 
that way and most of the /22 allocations to new LIRs from the final /8 were to 
existing organizations who spun up new, related entities in order to increase 
their IPv4 holdings:

https://labs.ripe.net/Members/wilhelm/so-long-last-8-and-thanks-for-all-the-allocations

I'm also sympathetic to new entrants, but don't see the current waiting list as 
a great help to them vs. the 4.10 pool or the transfer market, both of which 
allow you your allocation in a timely fashion.

Best Regards,

Tom Fantacone

---- On Mon, 29 Jul 2019 11:39:32 -0400 Fernando Frediani 
<fhfredi...@gmail.com<mailto:fhfredi...@gmail.com>> wrote ----

I find it interesting the idea of privileging the pool dedicated to
facilitate IPv6 Deployment and I also agree with the comments below in
the sense that it's not very beneficial do most ARIN members due to max
size, /22, cannot be holding more than a /20.

However one point I couldn't identify is where the new entrants stand in
this new possible scenario ? Will they only be able to apply under the
4.10 reserved pool ? If so for a access/broadband ISPs may be easier to
fit, but not necessarily for other scenarios and types of ISPs.
Therefore if I didn't miss anything these returned addresses should also
be able to go to new entrants, not only to 4.10 reserved pool conditions.

Best regards
Fernando Frediani

On 25/07/2019 17:32, Tom Fantacone wrote:
> I found the wording of the Problem Statement on this one a bit
> confusing. However, after deciphering the effect of the actual policy
> change I support it.
>
> Essentially, all returned IPv4 space will no longer go to the waiting
> list but will supplement the 4.10 reserved pool used to enhance IPv6
> deployment.  This essentially kills off the waiting list.
>
> The recent restrictions placed on the waiting list to reduce fraud
> have hobbled it to the point where it's not very beneficial to most
> ARIN members.  (Max size, /22, cannot be holding more than a /20).
> It's essentially only useful to new entrants, but those that go on it
> still have to wait many months to receive their small allocation.  If
> they justify need now, but have to wait that long, how critical is
> their need if they're willing to wait that long?  Small blocks are not
> terribly expensive and can be quickly gotten on the transfer market.
> I can understand waiting that long for a large block needed for a
> longer term project due to prohibitive cost, but I don't see a great
> benefit to the waiting list as it stands.
>
> Also, if there's any fraud left on the waiting list, this would kill it.
>
> I would hope, however, that if implemented, those currently on the
> waiting list would be grandfathered in.  I do think some entities with
> legitimate need got burned on the last change made to the waiting list.
>
> At 04:05 PM 7/23/2019, ARIN wrote:
>> On 18 July 2019, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted
>> "ARIN-prop-276: Returned Addresses to the 4.10 Reserved Pool" as a
>> Draft Policy.
>>
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2019-17 is below and can be found at:
>>
>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2019_17/
>>
>> You are encouraged to discuss all Draft Policies on PPML. The AC will
>> evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance of this
>> draft policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet number resource
>> policy as stated in the Policy Development Process (PDP).
>> Specifically, these principles are:
>>
>> * Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
>> * Technically Sound
>> * Supported by the Community
>>
>> The PDP can be found at:
>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/
>>
>> Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Sean Hopkins
>> Policy Analyst
>> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>>
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2019-17: Returned Addresses to the 4.10 Reserved Pool
>>
>> Problem Statement:
>>
>> An inconsistent and unpredictable stream of address space is an
>> unsuitable method of populating the waiting list (4.1.8.1) and
>> fulfilling subsequent requests.
>>
>> Policy statement:
>>
>> Change "4.10. Dedicated IPv4 Block to Facilitate IPv6 Deployment" to
>> "4.10 Dedicated IPv4 Pool to Facilitate IPv6 Deployment"
>>
>> Change" When ARIN receives its last /8 IPv4 allocation from IANA, a
>> contiguous /10 IPv4 block will be set aside and dedicated to
>> facilitate IPv6 deployment. Allocations and assignments from this
>> block " to "In addition to the contiguous /10 IPv4 block set aside
>> and dedicated to facilitate IPv6 deployment, all returns and
>> revocations of IPv4  blocks will be added to the pool of space
>> dedicated to the facilitation of IPv6 deployment. Allocations and
>> assignments from this pool "
>>
>> Change "This block will be subject to a minimum size allocation of
>> /28 and a maximum size allocation of /24. ARIN should use sparse
>> allocation when possible within that /10 block." to "This pool will
>> be subject to a minimum size allocation of /28 and a maximum sized
>> allocation of /24. ARIN should use sparse allocation when possible
>> within the pool."
>>
>> Comments:
>>
>> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List 
>> (ARIN-PPML@arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net>).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact i...@arin.net<mailto:i...@arin.net> if you experience any 
>> issues.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List 
> (ARIN-PPML@arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net>).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact i...@arin.net<mailto:i...@arin.net> if you experience any 
> issues.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List 
(ARIN-PPML@arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net<mailto:i...@arin.net> if you experience any issues.


_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.

Reply via email to