On Apr 29, 2013, at 2:46 PM, Lee Howard <l...@asgard.org> wrote: > On 4/29/13 1:03 AM, "Jérôme Nicolle" <jer...@ceriz.fr> wrote: > >> It is necessary to keep an acceptable churn and still allocate small >> blocks to newcomers, merely to deploy CGNs. >> >> Not doing so would end up in courts for entry barrier enforced by a >> monopoly (the RIRs). > > There is a /10 reserved to facilitate IPv6 deployment: > https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four10 > "Reclamation" is facilitated by offering a financial benefit, i.e., > selling underused addresses.
Note that under the "slow start" IPv4 address allocation policies, small ISPs do not qualify for an initial allocation from ARIN until they have utilized a provider-assigned block of the minimum size specified (based on being singly-homed or multi-homed.) These same criteria now apply to receipt of an address block via transfer, so at regional IPv4 free pool depletion may be _very_ difficult to satisfy. There are a number of ways of addressing this (changing initial ISP allocation policy, changing dependence on allocation policies for transfer approvals, establishing a reserved block for new entrants, etc.) but if left unaddressed will leave circumstances such that new entrants are precluded from participating in the transfer market as a recipient. This is the type of outcome that is generally frowned upon by governments for obvious reasons, and should be very carefully considered by the community. FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN