[address-policy-wg] Vanity address allocations and the end of IPv4
Jim Reid jim at rfc1035.com
Mon Mar 29 14:26:58 CEST 2010
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. Very Bad Things will happen if the RIRs allocate resources in ways that violate our policies. Or there's a suggestion that the current rules are not being followed. Or a suspiciion that needs-based allocation no longer applies. Governments, regulators and competition authorities are going to be paying special attention to what RIRs do with the remaining IPv4 space. So it's essential that there's not even a hint of the RIRs treating allocation requests differently by applying criteria which are not part of the current policies. The week before last, the ITU had a meeting where they discussed the possibility of becoming an RIR. [Some of the motivations for that included "fairness towards developing countries", "reduced cost" and "addressing the imblance of IPv4 allocations." Sigh.] If the RIRs are suspected of bending their own policies, this will give ammunition to those who say that these Internet people are not to be trusted -- "See! They ignore their own rules/processes or make them up as they go along!" -- and it's time for the ITU to step in and provide adult supervision. As far as getting the block containing 184.108.40.206 goes, I think the way forward should be for the LIR to keep an eye out for when that block is about to be allocated, submit a template at the appropriate point and take their chances. IIUC this is what some folk have sort of done with AS numbers. I have heard of people who monitor the RIR databases and watch for "interesting" ASNs to be handed back. When such a number is returned to the RIR, they then submit a template for a new ASN and hope it gets allocated the one that was just returned.