[AfriNIC-rpd] Policy Proposal "xxxxxx " now Available Online

[Owen DeLong]

This proposal is ill advised at best.

There are many legitimate uses of address space that may not appear in any routing table
visible from any particular vantage point.

Un-routed (from some particular perspective) is not the same as un-routed everywhere.
Even in the case of un-routed in all publicly visible tables, this does not guarantee that the
space is not in legitimate use or exempt from a need for global uniqueness.

There are many private networks that connect to large numbers of other private networks,
many of which then connect to the internet. In these cases, globally unique numbers are
needed to prevent addressing collisions and overlaps among the various organizations
cooperating on the private network.

The references in section 3 et.seq. of the proposal seem to have an off-by-one
error, such as 3.2 which refers to "violation of 2.1" which appears, instead, to
be intended as "violation of 3.1".

The proposal is written such that it would apply only to allocations made before the proposal
became policy and would not apply to subsequent allocations. If this is the intent, it does
not make sense to me. While I understand the need for some ex post facto policies, a
policy that is exclusively ex post facto is simply wrong.

The claim in section 4.0 is that this policy will somehow significantly extend the lifetime of IPv4.
This claim is unsubstantiated and I believe it to be false.

In the best case, globally, there are estimated to be roughly 22 /8s that are significantly under-utilized.
If one were to reclaim all of them (which the most optimistic estimates say would take 4-5 years
and cost $millions in legal fees), this would extend the global free pool lifetime by just over 1 year
at 2010 consumption rates.

It makes much more sense to spend that 4-5 years implementing IPv6 than it does to pour
$millions more down the IPv4 rat-hole chasing less than a year of address space that will
likely never materialize and could significantly disrupt the RIR system in the process.

I am opposed to this proposal. It seeks to solve a non-problem and would be
damaging to legitimate existing uses of address space. It would be damaging
to the RIR system. It would be damaging to the community. It offers little, if anything
in return.

Owen


On Feb 15, 2011, at 6:49 AM, Mukom Akong T wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> The policy proposal "Reclamation of Allocated but Un-routed IPv4 Addresses" is now available on our website at http://www.afrinic.net/docs/policies/AFPUB-2011-v4-002-draft-01.htm
> 
> A text version of the proposal is included below:
> 
> Regards
> 
> _____
> 
> 
> Unique identifier: AFPUB-2011-v4-002-draft-01
> Draft Policy Name:  Reclamation of Allocated but Un-routed IPv4 Addresses.
> Author: Jackson Muthili | jacksonmuthi at gmail.com
> Draft Policy Version: 01
> Submission Date: February 8th 2011
> Related Policies:
> Amends: IPv4 Allocation Policy
> 
> 
> 
> 1.0 Summary of the Problem Being Addressed by this Policy Proposal
> 
> With the depletion of ICANN/IANA pool and the impending depletion of the AfriNIC pool, ISPs will soon be faced with the tough reality of IPv4 address scarcity. Some studies indicate that there is a lot of IPv4 that has been allocated but is not used or routed.
> 
> 2.0. Summary of How this Proposal Addresses the Problem Above
> 
> This proposal attempts to find a way to free this allocated but un-routed space so that it can be issued to ISPs that have a real use for it.
> 
> 3.0 The Proposal
> 
> The following will apply to all IPv4 allocations issued before policy is implemented:
> 
> 3.1 IPv4 allocations distributed by AfriNIC to the ISP must be seen in the routing table within 90 days of getting the addresses.
> 
> 3.2 AfriNIC must issue three(3) seven(7)-day interval warnings to the ISP that is in violation of 2.1 after the 90th day of getting the IPv4 allocation.
> 
> 3.3 AfriNIC must regain the IPv4 allocation from the ISP  seven(7) days after the last warning. The IPv4 space can be given to another ISP by AfriNIC when appropriate.
> 
> The following will apply to all IPv4 issued after the policy is implemented:
> 
> 3.4 IPv4 distributed by AfriNIC to the ISP must be seen in the routing table within thirty (30) days of getting the addresses.
> 
> 3.5 AfriNIC must issue two seven(7)-day interval warnings to the member that is in violation of 2.4 after the 30th day of getting the IPv4 allocation.
> 
> 3.6 AfriNIC must regain the IPv4 from the ISP seven(7) days after the last warning. The IPv4 can be given to another ISP by AfriNIC when appropriate.
> 
> 4.0 Summary
> 
> While this proposal will not significantly extend the lifetime of IPv4, it will ensure that unused IPv4 is righfully utilized and not hoarded by those ISPs that have no use for it.
> 
> 5.0 References
> http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/
> 
> 
> _____
> <tamon.vcf>_______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd