But really, if you expect to be taken seriously, you should write your draft about 240/4, not 240/3 :)
David Ponzone > Le 14 juin 2016 à 07:38, Tore Anderson <[email protected]> a écrit : > > Good morning Arash, > > * "Arash Naderpour" <[email protected]> > >> My question is that is this working group the right place to discuss >> about the 240/3 or it should be done in higher level like between >> RIRs or IANA? > > RIPE AP-WG is not the right place to begin this process, the IETF is. > > The process would go something like this: > > You submit a draft to the IETF to direct IANA to do something with with > 240/3, e.g., reclassify it as regular unicast IPv4 address space that > may be distributed to the RIRs. You'll then need to gain consensus for > your draft and have it published as an RFC. > > The /3 would then within six months be split up into five equal parts > and be distributed to each RIR over a period of a few years. ~6.4 /8s > per RIR, that is. The initial and biggest IANA->RIR trance would happen > no later than six months after your RFC was published. (If you're not > happy with that you'd need to seek global consensus between the five RIR > communities to change the «Global Policy for Post Exhaustion IPv4 > Allocation Mechanisms by the IANA» policy.) > > The RIPE NCC would add any address space received from the IANA in this > manner to the so-called «last /8» pool. So assuming you've already > received your final /22 under the current policy but want one or more > additional allocations from 240/3, you'll at this point need to return > to the RIPE AP-WG with a proposal to change the so-called «last /8» > policy into something else that would facilitate that. > > Assuming you manage all of the above, all that remains in order to make > 240/3 usable on the public Internet is to convince all the operating > system/device/router vendors in the world to develop and release > software/firmware updates to make 240/3 usable, and then of course to > convince every network operator and end-user on the Internet to > download and install these patches. Devices/software no longer being > supported by the manufacturer would probably need to be replaced > outright. > > If by some miracle you would be able to pull it all off, keep in mind > that the ~107M addresses gained by the RIPE NCC would all be used up > within two years if we return to the pre-depletion allocation policy > and consumption rate. Ask yourself: «then what?» > > Maybe you can now see why folks are telling you that this would be a > colossal waste of time and that your efforts would be much better spent > on IPv6. With IPv6, the process is already underway and most of the > above steps have already been completed, and at the end of that process > we're actually covered for the rest of our lifetimes and beyond. > > Tore > > > *********************************************************************************************************** > Le service MailSecure d'IPeva confirme l'absence de virus et de spam dans ce > message. > *********************************************************************************************************** > >
