Re: [sig-policy] prop-073-v002: Automatic allocation/assignment of IPv6
Hi All,
I was mulling over the concern with the term "reserve" this morning,
and thought it appropriate to highlight a few things.
Firstly, I still give leave to the secretariat to apply their own
operational definition to "reserve" as I'm sure they already employ a
function of 'reservation' currently due to the use of sparse
allocation (ie in the sparse allocation policy proposal discussion the
terms reservation and reserve were freely used as to earmark a
contiguous portion for _potential_ future allocation/growth). I don't
think that needs to be stated in the policy proposal itself. I'm
comfortable that the secretariat is smart enough to work out how best
to employ the use of the term, be that for laying out an allocation
plan based on member's current holdings, or adjusting that plan when a
member acquires more IPv4 addresses prior to a v6 allocation, or to
precisely define when the prefix is reserved v allocated (for
contention avoidance in electronic systems).
Secondly, given that the current definition of 'reserved' (as applied
to LIRs) is that "reserved address space is considered to be
unassigned." I'm still looking to see what harm this creates. We know
that there is no current threat of running out of IPv6 so the act of
reserving some arbitrary prefix for 2 months or 2 minutes isn't going
to deny space to someone else. Nor is it going to consume resources
unnecessarily as it is 'considered to be unassigned' and the member
won't (or shouldn't) even know the exact prefix until it is allocated.
Can that reservation change prior to allocation? Most definitely. We
don't specify that it can't change, and to do so would be folly. So if
you can see your way to accepting that the use of the term 'reserved'
is not meant to mean 'for perpetuity', or 'fixed in nature, size or
scope' as it is applied to _IANA reserved numbers_, we could agree
that current proposal is sound.
Lastly I look on the term as just a tool for allowing the secretariat
to get 'best use' of the address space either through like sized
allocations, geography or NIR impact. Further, I prefer the idea that
we are upfront about the allocation process that the secretariat
employs for us. If they do a 'reservation' minutes before, or weeks
before the allocation/assignment it never hurts to be transparent
about that. So by using the term 'reserve' I'm not prescribing a fix
to a problem that a 'reservation' could provide, I'm guiding a general
process that I would like the secretariat to employ.
Cheers
Terry