Re: [IANAxfer@apnic] Key elements of the transition of IANA stewardship
On Sep 11, 2014, at 11:09 PM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:
> On 11-Sep-14 08:33, John Curran wrote:
>> Again, feel free to run one if you'd like, and assign
>> the entire 32-bit IP address space to various parties in "Richard's Global
>> IP Registry"
>
> Intriguing question.
>
> And a little mean.
Apologies - I was trying to be factual in nature, as Richard postulated some
top down "authority" as dictating how IP addresses must be used. In truth, it
is the other way around, wherein the Internet number Registry system provides
a functional service of globally coordinated uniqueness, so Internet service
and content providers find it useful to make use of it. There is no ability
by anyone to command its use, but the availability of widely-used globally
unique addresses is rather compelling.
> Nonetheless, a thought experiment since you seem to posit something as
> within the realm of possibility.
>
> What would it take for Richard and Friends to acquire control over some
> IP address space; Either v4 (maybe they get it from the legacies) or v6
> (maybe they just ask for an unassigned block). Would they be allowed to
> allocate the v4 (perhaps one way for MENA and other v4 deprived
> communities to get it)? Would they be allocated by IANA a block of v6?
> If not, why not? Especially since there are enough bits for an infinity
> of universes.
Avri - You probably want to read RFC 7020 for background on the Internet
Number Registry System. While everyone is familiar with IANA and the RIRs,
it is also true that there is an entire system of ISPs and local Internet
registries (LIRs) that perform assignments in turn to their customers
(usually, but not always, as part of their Internet service bundle.)
If your address block is unique with respect to the everyone else's in the
RIRs and IANA registries, then it's part of the Internet Number Registry
System. If you have addresses that are only unique with respect to a small
number of others because _you_ are maintaining an independent directory of
who can uniquely use each possible 32-bit IPv4 address, then you have a
created a completely independent registry.
It would be fairly difficult to start issuing IPv4 space from the Internet
Number Registry System, because the IANA is effectively in the final phase
of IPv4 and has no real available resources to issue to any Internet number
registry (RIR or otherwise.)
> And what if people around the world, perhaps members of global
> organizations or just a bottom-up groundswell of contrarians, applauded
> and said yes, we want IP allocations from Richard and Friends? Would
> that be allowed? Who needs to allow it? IANA? How do they decide? The
> RIRs? why? Because they were there first?
Actually, there have been organizations that have run completely distinct
IPv4 address registries (effectively keeping their own list of who gets to
use each possible unique address, without regard to the IANA and the RIRs);
this was what I meant when I pointed out to Richard that it is indeed
possible to do, but you only have effective communication with community
that decides to follow that same registry (since there are conflicts when
trying to interconnect with those using the Internet Number Registry System.)
In the past, this sort of approach of private registry was done in order
to provide a very large address space for supplier networks to operate, i.e.
effectively making a very large virtual private network. I don't think these
are in operation now, as the overhead of keeping some of their machines on
'real' Internet addressing and some on 'privately coordinated' Internet
addressing is significant effort.
But it does work, anyone can use the Internet protocols with any IP
addresses they like, it's just advised that you coordinate with those
who wish to interconnect with regarding choice of numbers. The vast
majority of ISP's and their customers find making use of the Internet
Number Registry System a convenient way to do that coordination...
> Would that be allowed? Who needs to allow it? IANA? How do they decide? The
> RIRs? why? Because they were there first?
Of course it's allowed, how could it not be? You can use IP protocols
with any numbers you wish, but your realm of interoperability extends
only as far as your scope of your Internet addressing coordination.
Just as you use any address block you wish in your private networking
lab, you can do the same for your corporate network or among your and
your associates; just remember, you'll only be able to have reliable
communicate with others who coordinate via the same Internet address
registry, whether that's the "default" one provided for in RFC 7020
or a completely separate coordination of your own devising.
> If the people wanting it are enough for authority - and I agree that is
> the way it should be, then how could Richard and Friends make this happen?
Yes, completely independent registries are possible, with a usefulness
which matches the scope of coordination. No one can prevent you from
configuring your equipment with any IP address in the world, you just
have to realize that if it is not coordinated globally, the addresses
are not going to be useful for communicating with others globally.
With respect to new registries within the existing Internet Number
Registry System, discussions about such registries take place in the
RIR and ICANN communities via development of global number resource
policies. It is not just uniqueness that is needed to make an address
block useful, but it is also having the ISP community decide that they
will route address blocks as they are issued within the registry system.
As such, discussions of how registries come into being, how IANA issues
address space to them, and how they issue in turn to service providers
and end-users is of interest to the entire community and have to be
global policy since the routing implications are global in nature.
FYI,
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN