[address-policy-wg] Vanity address allocations and the end of IPv4
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Vanity address allocations and the end of IPv4
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Vanity address allocations and the end of IPv4
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Shane Kerr
shane at time-travellers.org
Mon Mar 29 15:48:58 CEST 2010
Jim, On 2010-03-29 14:26, Jim Reid wrote: > On 29 Mar 2010, at 12:35, Shane Kerr wrote: > >> * I support allowing people to request specific unused resources > > Of course. Unused resources are there to be used. > >> * I hope that can be done without a policy change > > By that I hope you don't mean that the NCC does some fancy footwork > around the current policies to give an LIR the particular address block > they want. It is extremely important now that we're in the end-game for > IPv4 that the current non-discriminatory policies based on technical > need are followed. If there is a new requirement for allocating the > remaining resources -- eg vanity addresses -- that simply has to go > through the policy making process. IMO it would be very unwise to tinker > with these policies for non-technical reasons as IPv4 runs out. To be clear, we're not talking about anyone getting more or less address space, or allocating in a way that makes aggregation more difficult. I thought those were the two basic goals of IP allocation policy, right? The RIPE NCC does not have any restrictions on which particular resources it allocates or assigns. In fact, I am pretty sure that any sensible person would argue that the RIPE NCC should have as much freedom as possible to do things in the most efficient way. So I think the RIPE NCC already has the power to issue "vanity addresses" in the rare case where someone asks for these. Mostly I find it a pity that the NCC wasn't more accommodating and that we're having this discussion at all. Maybe the software used for this process does not have a manual override or something? Oh well, compared to the horror stories I hear about the bad old days, I guess we have no complaints.... In the end I suppose we can just let the addresses fall wherever and let "the market" sort it out, now that there is a "trading" policy. While the desire for vanity addresses might accelerate the process of IP addresses becoming property, that is probably inevitable, so it won't change the big picture too much. -- Shane
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Vanity address allocations and the end of IPv4
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Vanity address allocations and the end of IPv4
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]