[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [sig-policy] IPv4 countdown policy proposal
Ray,
At 02:52 07/03/05, Ray Plzak wrote:
You are missing my point because perhaps I was not
to clear. For that, I apologize. What I am saying is:
I AM sorry for misunderstand your idea.
1. At some point the IANA reserve will be
depleted.
2. At some point the RIRs will no longer be able to allocate IPv4 address
space in the manner that they currently do.
3. The RIRs will always have some IPv4 space, just not in the quantities
of aggregated sizes that they currently have.
4. IPv4 is not going away. Persons will continue to have a need for it.
Given the lower cost of using IPv4 as a start up (there is much more used
IPv4 equipment available at the moment than used IPv6 equipment or used
dual stack equipment) it will still be an attractive option for those who
have a limited amount of money and do not necessarily need large amounts
of address space.
You may be right. But I have another idea that IPv6 will become cheaper
solution eventually
when IPv6 is more frequently used.
No one knows which will be true. Then, from viewpoint of risk management,
worse case which IPv4 address is going away should be considered. This
is
my humble idea.
5. IPv4 space will come available because of
conversion to IPv6 or changes of business activity that will require
recycling of that address space. This can occur in the current RIR system
or it could cause the growth of a black market particularly in areas
where there is still a strong demand for IPv4 address
space.
Again you may be right. Yes, black market (or controled one) may
occur.
But I doubt IPv6 suppress IPv4. Even if LIR starts IPv6,
they will make request of not only IPv6 but IPv4 address as ever
because
it is dualstack in most cases.
Anyway, according to many opinions, we must study address marketization
issue
as soon as possible, separate from considering countdown policy or
something like this.
Although marketization issue may be controversial and it seems to take
long time to discuss,
we will have to reach some consensus within, say, two years, when IANA
stocks will be
less than 30 /8s and otherwise it would be too late.
It is this environment that will require the RIR
communities to rethink the policies that are used to manage IPv4 address
space.
With regard to your comment:
"It should be registries' responsibility to allow and help LIRs to
make future plans such as transiting to IPv6, staying IPv4 or
whatever."
It is the communities that make these decisions and in fact this has
always been the case.
Yes, then JPNIC gets many opinions from JP community and is proposing to
APNIC and then to ARIN.
With regard to specifically aiding or allowing
transit to IPv6, in my opinion the policies in each of the regions has
become more and more liberalized over time. In the ARIN region this not
only applies to the allocation policies but also to the fact that ARIN
has applied an increasingly liberal waiver of service fees associated
with IPv6 address allocation. It would appear to me that if these
policies pertaining to IPv6 address space do not provide the LIRs with
sufficient latitude to make future plans to transit to IPv6 then they
should work in that area. Applying a tourniquet to the flow of IPv4
address space to "create" an IPv6 market or to force adoption
of IPv6 is not the answer.
This time, you may misunderstand our point because our english is so
poor. We apolozise for it.
We don't insist IPv6 is not only way to go. Some LIRs may move dialup
pools and internal
addresses all to broadband services and continue IPv4 services.
Some LIRs may provide IPv4 private address services with NAT
in provider edge (which I personally don't think make sense).
LIRs can make their plans and cope with the risk only if registries can
provide more precise
infomation and give some warning to them. (The latter may be Asian or
Japanese way, though...)
Anyway precise information such as exact date is necessary.
The following is not a legal opinion of mine as I
am not an attorney but it seems to me that it is this type of action that
could lead some to make restraint of trade anti-trust arguments against
one or more RIRs. This would be very detrimental to the current system of
community self-regulation.
Yes, we should consider.
Regards,
Takashi Arano
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Takashi Arano
[
mailto:arano@inetcore.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 10:41 PM
> To: Ray Plzak
> Cc: MAEMURA Akinori; plzak@arin.net; arano@inetcore.com;
> bob@brockhurst.co.nz; sig-policy@lists.apnic.net;
takashi@arano.jp
> Subject: RE: [sig-policy] IPv4 countdown policy proposal
>
> Ray,
>
> At 23:34 07/03/03, Ray Plzak wrote:
> >Thank you for your message. One thing to bear in mind is that
IPv4
> will never "run out" or "be exhausted". What
will happen is that the
> large IANA reserve will be depleted and that consequently RIRs will
no
> longer be able to allocate IPv4 in the same manner as they do
> currently. The fact is that the RIRs will always have some IPv4
space,
> just not enough to meet the allocation demand that they currently
have,
> nor even the minimum allocation size. Policy work in this area
should
> be done in such a manner to meet the challenge of the change in
the
> IPv4 allocation environment. The environment will change but it
will
> not go away.
>
> OK.
> If ARIN can make announcement to continue allocating IPv4 forever
or
> for long time,
> LIRs would be happier.
> Then, I would like to hear how you can achieve the above under
what
> kind of policy.
>
> It should be registries' responsibility to allow and help LIRs to
make
> future plans such as
> transiting to IPv6, staying IPv4 or whatever.
>
> Your comments as the ARIN president, unless it accompanys any
more
> concrete idea,
> might mislead LIRs that they will continue to be able to rely on
IPv4
> only.
>
> >If the RIRs stop allocating IPv4 address space then it will
be
> allocated in some other manner. This will not be good for the
Internet.
>
> Agree.
>
> Regards,
> Takashi Arano
>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: MAEMURA Akinori
[
mailto:maem@nic.ad.jp]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:44 AM
> >> To: plzak@arin.net; arano@inetcore.com;
bob@brockhurst.co.nz
> >> Cc: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net; takashi@arano.jp
> >> Subject: Re: [sig-policy] IPv4 countdown policy
proposal
> >>
> >> Thanks Ray.
> >> I miss you here in Bali by the way.
> >>
> >> I think Paul will introduce your comment in front of
APNIC
> >> community.
> >>
> >> I agree that Legal implication should be carefully
revisited.
> >>
> >> I think the Internet Registries who distribute the IP
number
> >> resource cannot be helped to comply to the run-out of
our
> >> resource. I would like to have your ider if you had
a
> >> diffent perspective on this idea.
> >>
> >> I think the legal implication with any address policy
action
> >> should be resolved by the Registries. Even if the
community
> >> were advised of such a legal risk, the community at most
can
> >> take it into account in the framework of their own
businesses,
> >> but not of Registries. (Correct me if you think I am in a
wrong
> >> shape.)
> >>
> >> The proposer team would really love to find a good solution
to
> >> confront this forthcoming epoch. We do need your
cooperation
> >> and we are flexible enough to include any of your
inputs
> >> regardless technically or at large, in order to achieve
OUR
> >> goal.
> >>
> >> Thank you, and keep in touch on this issue.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> -----
> >> MAEMURA
Akinori
General Manager, IP Department
> >> JPNIC - Japan Network Information
Center maem@nic.ad.jp
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> In message
<D7E170CA59F2F24EA64244745D01E75904E04D5C@ex.arin.net>
> >> "RE: [sig-policy] IPv4 countdown
policy proposal"
> >> "Ray Plzak
<plzak@arin.net>" wrote:
> >>
> >> | This policy proposal has now been introduced into the
ARIN region.
> >> | I will not speak to the merits of this proposal, but will
ask the
> >> | question that the ARIN General Counsel is now taking up:
What is
> >> | the liability exposure to ARIN if this policy is
adopted? What
> are
> >> | the anti-trust implications if this is adopted by
ARIN?
> Additionally,
> >> | the attorneys of all the RIRs should consider what is the
anti-
> trust
> >> | implication of this proposal if adopted globally? I do
not intend
> >> | for this to start a legal discussion on this list by a
bunch of
> >> people
> >> | who are not attorneys but rather to say that this
proposal like
> any
> >> | other proposal can have consequences that the authors of
the
> proposal
> >> | do not intend. In the case of the anti-trust
implications, this
> could
> >> | be extremely harmful to any RIR that adopts it, and
therefore this
> >> | should be carefully scrutinized by competent attorneys
before the
> >> | community adopts it.
> >> |
> >> | By this message, I ask Paul Wilson to introduce my
comments into
> the
> >> | discussion of this policy at the APNIC meeting.
> >> |
> >> | Ray
> >> |
> >> | > -----Original Message-----
> >> | > From: sig-policy-bounces@lists.apnic.net
[<mailto:sig-policy->
>mailto:sig-policy
-
>
><mailto:sig-policy
->> | > bounces@lists.apnic.net] On Behalf Of
> Takashi Arano
> >> | > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 12:55 AM
> >> | > To: Robert Gray
> >> | > Cc: sig-policy@lists.apnic.net; Takashi Arano;
Takashi Arano
> >> | > Subject: Re: [sig-policy] IPv4 countdown policy
proposal
> >> | >
> >> | > Hi Robert,
> >> | >
> >> | > At 04:51 07/02/28, Robert Gray wrote:
> >> | > >>IPv4 exhaustion gives negative impact, more
or less.
> >> | > >>The issue here is how to reduce the pain. As
Randy said,
> choice
> >> of
> >> | > short sharp pain or long-term pain well describes
this issue.
> >> | > >
> >> | > >Arano-san
> >> | > >
> >> | > >I'm not sure that the choice is this
simple.
> >> | > >
> >> | > >The community needs to promote a progressive
global deployment
> of
> >> IPv6
> >> | > and this needs to start very soon otherwise there
will be no
> >> ability to
> >> | > transition when the time (however defined)
comes.
> >> | > >
> >> | > >I do not think that the imposition of arbitrary
exhaustion
> dates
> >> will
> >> | > of itself be sufficient to make this happen.
> >> | >
> >> | > Our intention is not to impose something.
> >> | > This is intended to guarantee LIRs to get IPv4
addresses by the
> >> | > specific date pre-announced.
> >> | > As a result, x-date would be shorten just by one a
few months.
> >> | > We believe it is useful and necessary for LIR/ISP's
planning
> >> division.
> >> | >
> >> | > >>Anyway, time proceeds. We have to confront
this issue
> seriously
> >> | > >>and as soon as possible.
> >> | > >
> >> | > >Here we agree 100%
> >> | > >
> >> | > >The difference in approach seems to be that some
of us would
> like
> >> to
> >> | > see more action taken sooner to specifically promote
IPv6
> >> deployment
> >> | > rather than concentrating solely on what happens
until x-date
> >> | >
> >> | > Yes, on different hats of mine, the IPv6 forum and
Asia Pacific
> >> IPv6
> >> | > Task Force
> >> | > are going to promote IPv6 and provide some
guidelines for ISPs
> more
> >> | > seriously than ever.
> >> | >
> >> | > Regards,
> >> | > Takashi Arano
> >> | >
> >> | >
*
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management
> policy
> >> | > *
> >> | > _______________________________________________
> >> | > sig-policy mailing list
> >> | > sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> >> | >
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> >> |
> >> |
*
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management
> policy
> >> *
> >> | _______________________________________________
> >> | sig-policy mailing list
> >> | sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
> >> |
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
> >> |
> >> |
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
荒野高志 (株)インテック・ネットコア
> Email: arano@inetcore.com Phone: 03-5665-5069
> IPv6無料情報提供サイト:
http://entne.jp/
（Windows
> Vista抽選でプレゼント、3/31まで）
> 個人ブログ:
http://blog.goo.ne.jp/v6arano/
>
---------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------
荒野高志 (株)インテック・ネットコア
Email: arano@inetcore.com Phone: 03-5665-5069
IPv6無料情報提供サイト:
http://entne.jp/
（Windows
Vista抽選でプレゼント、3/31まで）
個人ブログ:
http://blog.goo.ne.jp/v6arano/
---------------------------------------------------------
