Re: [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] prop-062-v001: Use of final /8
- To: Philip Smith <pfs at cisco dot com>, Geoff Huston <gih at apnic dot net>
- Subject: Re: [sig-policy] [Sig-policy] prop-062-v001: Use of final /8
- From: David Woodgate <David.Woodgate at telstra dot net>
- Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:10:15 +1000
- Cc: 'APNIC Policy SIG List' <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
- Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
- In-reply-to: <48848041.50104 at cisco dot com>
- List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
- List-help: <mailto:email@example.com?subject=help>
- List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
- List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=subscribe>
- List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=unsubscribe>
- References: <email@example.com> <200807160431.m6G4VA28084482@burn.telstra.net> <49ADDDED-D274-4F3C-A16B-696240DB0E29@iroute.org> <200807170100.m6H10NP8099257@burn.telstra.net> <ED13462B-15CF-4916-91B0-1F0522F9AACF@jonnynet.net> <487F2F65.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com>
Philip, At 10:25 PM 21/07/2008, Philip Smith wrote:
My main problem is that prop-062 seems to risk locking up the majority of the last /8, and therefore does not share it at all, let alone in a fair and equitable fashion.The goal of the policy is purely to ensure that the "precious" /8 realised by prop-55 is shared out amongst the stakeholders in the APNIC service region in a way that could be considered fair and equitable to all.
I'd be more sympathetic to a proposal which:- Was more aligned with the LACNIC proposal - that is, it reserved a smaller amount of space (the LACNIC proposal only specifies a /12) for *only* new businesses, based on a reasonable demand forecast model.
- Considered reservations on the basis of associations between IPv4 allocations and IPv6 deployment or other technical requirements - an example (but not the only possible idea) is ARIN proposal 2008-5 (authored by Alain Durand)
- Identified that any part of the /8 not covered by these reservations would be available for demand-based allocation under the APNIC's normal allocation policies.
(Please note that "more sympathetic" does *not* mean I would automatically guarantee my support - but there would certainly be more chance of it than with the current draft.)