Hi Terry and all,
On 2/12/2010 11:21 AM, Terry Manderson wrote:
Hi Sanjaya,
On 01/12/2010, at 5:08 PM, Sanjaya wrote:
While we have the ability to track our IPv4 stock level internally, we
are still working on finalizing a public reporting format that meets the
community needs.
"Still working"? I was unaware that a discussion paper or community feedback request was sent out. If this has or was done, my apologies and please provide a URL.
It's a follow up to the Final stages of IPv4 distribution Guangliang
presented in APNIC 30 Gold Coast. He explained the different states of
APNIC resources.
http://meetings.apnic.net/30/program/plenary
What is the currently held list of community needs?
That we need to show the total resources in the different states, so we
all know which Phase of the Final stages we are on.
We'd like to hear more from you about how we can best
do this, so please keep sending ideas to this list. We are monitoring
this thread closely. Thanks.
Currently not knowing what you have listed as 'community needs' I might be suggesting already considered options. But here goes.
All of the RIRs appear to participate in the RIR stats production as seen here:
ftp://ftp.apnic.net/apnic/stats/apnic/
and the description of the stats format here:
http://www.apnic.net/publications/media-library/documents/resource-guideline...
So not wanting to reinvent the wheel completely.
Perhaps update the enumerated list of 'status' to include "reserved" and "unallocated". In the 'extensions' field provide more information about the reason for the reserved/unallocated status.
e.g.
- RQA state
- PDP outcome such the /16 in the final /8 (PROP-reference)
- Targeted allocation such as critical infrastructure assignments
- 'dirty' prefix due to debogon research
- ..
The date field should reflect when any status, or extension 'state' (for RQA) changes.
It probably doesn't need to be said, but the IP resources _should_ be in efficient aggregated CIDR blocks where possible. (as opposed to non-cidr blocks) I'm happy for best effort...
I'm also leaning to a "pending" status - meaning that the resource block has been earmarked for something that does not yet fit into reserved or unallocated. And thus a meaningful description can be put into the extensions section. This makes sense if the earmarking lasts for more than one issuance of the stats file.
Cheers
Terry
Thanks for this. Yes, we have considered extending the stats file, but
we were wondering if that level of detail is needed to track the last
stages of IPv4. Unless people need it for other reasons as well, which
we're interested to hear.
Would you mind adding the why, the benefits/risks and the reporting
frequency, so others can share their views as well? Thanks!
Cheers,
Sanjaya