I support this proposal. Rudi Daniel (information technologist) 784 430 9235 On Apr 29, 2014 2:30 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Policy Proposal: Reduce all Minimum Allocation/Assignment > units to /24 (David Conrad) > 2. Re: Policy Proposal: Reduce all Minimum Allocation/Assignment > units to /24 (Andrew Sullivan) > 3. Re: NRPM 4.10 - is a /10 large enough? (David Farmer) > 4. Re: NRPM 4.10 - is a /10 large enough? (Skylar MacMinn) > 5. Re: NRPM 4.10 - is a /10 large enough? (Leslie Nobile) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 11:22:30 -0700 > From: David Conrad <[email protected]> > To: Owen DeLong <[email protected]> > Cc: Public Policy Mailing List <[email protected]>, [email protected] > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Reduce all Minimum > Allocation/Assignment units to /24 > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Support. > > Regards, > -drc > > On Apr 29, 2014, at 10:58 AM, Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Template: ARIN-POLICY-PROPOSAL-TEMPLATE-3.0 > > > > 1. Policy Proposal Name: Reduce all Minimum > Allocation/Assignment units to /24 > > 2. Proposal Originator > > a. name: Owen DeLong > > b. email: [email protected] > > c. telephone: 408-890-7992 > > d. organization: Hurricane Electric > > 3. Date: 29 April, 2014 > > 4. Problem Statement: > > As we approach runout, more and more end users and smaller ISPs will be > unable to obtain space from their upstreams and will be seeking space from > ARIN. In order to meet these needs to the extent possible and to make > policy more fair to a broader range of the ARIN constituency, we should > reduce the minimum assignment and allocation units to /24 across the board. > > 5. Policy statement: > > Change the minimum allocation and assignment unit for all IPv4 single > and multi homed instances to /20. This would include: > > > > 4.2.1.5 Change all occurrences of /20 and /22 to /24 > > 4.2.2.1.1 Change all occurrences of /20 to /24, and change 16 /24s to 1 > /24. Remove the example about 12 /24s. > > 4.3.2.1 Change both occurrences of /20 to /24 > > 4.9 Change /22 to /24 > > 4.9.1 Change all instances of /22 to /24. Remove the reference to 4 /24s. > > > > 6. Comments: > > a. Timetable for implementation: Immediate, possibly > through board action. > > b. Anything else > > > > END OF TEMPLATE > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PPML > > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140429/ae7baf44/attachment-0001.html > > > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 495 bytes > Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail > URL: < > http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140429/ae7baf44/attachment-0001.bin > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 14:23:55 -0400 > From: Andrew Sullivan <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Reduce all Minimum > Allocation/Assignment units to /24 > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > I support this. > > A > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 10:58:58AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: > > Template: ARIN-POLICY-PROPOSAL-TEMPLATE-3.0 > > > > 1. Policy Proposal Name: Reduce all Minimum > Allocation/Assignment units to /24 > > 2. Proposal Originator > > a. name: Owen DeLong > > b. email: [email protected] > > c. telephone: 408-890-7992 > > d. organization: Hurricane Electric > > 3. Date: 29 April, 2014 > > 4. Problem Statement: > > As we approach runout, more and more end users and smaller ISPs will be > unable to obtain space from their upstreams and will be seeking space from > ARIN. In order to meet these needs to the extent possible and to make > policy more fair to a broader range of the ARIN constituency, we should > reduce the minimum assignment and allocation units to /24 across the board. > > 5. Policy statement: > > Change the minimum allocation and assignment unit for all IPv4 single > and multi homed instances to /20. This would include: > > > > 4.2.1.5 Change all occurrences of /20 and /22 to /24 > > 4.2.2.1.1 Change all occurrences of /20 to /24, and change 16 /24s to 1 > /24. Remove the example about 12 /24s. > > 4.3.2.1 Change both occurrences of /20 to /24 > > 4.9 Change /22 to /24 > > 4.9.1 Change all instances of /22 to /24. Remove the reference to 4 /24s. > > > > 6. Comments: > > a. Timetable for implementation: Immediate, possibly > through board action. > > b. Anything else > > > > END OF TEMPLATE > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > PPML > > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > > > -- > Andrew Sullivan > [email protected] > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 13:23:56 -0500 > From: David Farmer <[email protected]> > To: [email protected], [email protected] > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] NRPM 4.10 - is a /10 large enough? > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > If I'm not mistaken the reserved /10 for IPv6 deployment and /16 for > micro-allocations is not included in the counter. Could staff confirm > please. > > Further, there is an additional approximately /10 that will come from > the IANA recovered address pool. I'm comfortable with this being > reserved for special purposes, if we see fit. > > However, I'm not comfortable with reserving more out of the current free > pool at this point. We are well past the point where making that kind > of change can occur without causing potentially bad side effects. Any > drastic change in what is available for normal allocations at this point > is likely create a panic. > > We discussed this as a community, there were proposals to reserve larger > chunks including the whole last /8 as RIPE and APNIC did. We chose this > strategy. In some situations never is better than too late. > > My best advice is find your towel and DON'T PANIC! > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Panic_(The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy)#Knowing_where_one.27s_towel_is > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Panic_(The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy)#Don.27t_Panic > > > Thanks > > On 4/29/14, 12:54 , Bill Owens wrote: > > A couple of recent threads here and my general sense of the (lack of) > urgency around IPv6 deployment has made me wonder whether setting aside a > /10 under NRPM 4.10 - Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 Deployment - > is really going to be enough. I was looking at Geoff Huston's graphs ( > http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/) and noticed that both RIPE and APNIC, > by coincidence, will be using up the first /10 out of their reserved /8s at > about the same time, near the end of this year. A naive calculation says > that APNIC will go through the /10 in about 3.5 years, and RIPE in about > 2.2 years. Of course it is difficult to predict how the runout of the > reserved /10 under 4.10 will look, but I think it's reasonable to assume > that it won't be any slower than 2-3 years, since unlike RIPE and APNIC > there's no limit to how much space an entity can receive under 4.10, only > the pace at which it can be handed out; assuming the maximum rate, a /22 > can be issued to someone every two years, > r > > ather than once and done as with the other two RIRs. > > > > Given that the inventory currently contains one /9 and one /10, we are > getting close to the point where any additional set-asides will no longer > be possible, so I thought it might be worthwhile at least considering > whether the 4.10 pool ought to be enlarged while it still can be. . . > > > > Bill. > > _______________________________________________ > > PPML > > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > > > > > -- > ================================================ > David Farmer Email: [email protected] > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815 > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952 > ================================================ > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:28:50 +0000 > From: Skylar MacMinn <[email protected]> > To: David Farmer <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] NRPM 4.10 - is a /10 large enough? > Message-ID: > < > 35b435b0b0c1467ab538545788cad...@dm2pr0801mb569.namprd08.prod.outlook.com> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I'd expect the Quick jump from 1.34 to 1.00 with the Cloudflare /12 and > the Akamai /10 to have caused enough panic as is. I'd support reserving the > IANA recovered address pool for that, but not current available IPv4 space. > > Cordially Yours, > > Skylar MacMinn > www.crissic.net > Crissic Solutions, LLC > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of David Farmer > Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 1:24 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] NRPM 4.10 - is a /10 large enough? > > If I'm not mistaken the reserved /10 for IPv6 deployment and /16 for > micro-allocations is not included in the counter. Could staff confirm > please. > > Further, there is an additional approximately /10 that will come from the > IANA recovered address pool. I'm comfortable with this being reserved for > special purposes, if we see fit. > > However, I'm not comfortable with reserving more out of the current free > pool at this point. We are well past the point where making that kind of > change can occur without causing potentially bad side effects. Any drastic > change in what is available for normal allocations at this point is likely > create a panic. > > We discussed this as a community, there were proposals to reserve larger > chunks including the whole last /8 as RIPE and APNIC did. We chose this > strategy. In some situations never is better than too late. > > My best advice is find your towel and DON'T PANIC! > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Panic_(The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy)#Knowing_where_one.27s_towel_is > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Panic_(The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy)#Don.27t_Panic > > > Thanks > > On 4/29/14, 12:54 , Bill Owens wrote: > > A couple of recent threads here and my general sense of the (lack of) > > urgency around IPv6 deployment has made me wonder whether setting > > aside a /10 under NRPM 4.10 - Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 > > Deployment - is really going to be enough. I was looking at Geoff > > Huston's graphs (http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/) and noticed that > > both RIPE and APNIC, by coincidence, will be using up the first /10 > > out of their reserved /8s at about the same time, near the end of this > > year. A naive calculation says that APNIC will go through the /10 in > > about 3.5 years, and RIPE in about 2.2 years. Of course it is > > difficult to predict how the runout of the reserved /10 under 4.10 > > will look, but I think it's reasonable to assume that it won't be any > > slower than 2-3 years, since unlike RIPE and APNIC there's no limit to > > how much space an entity can receive under 4.10, only the pace at > > which it can be handed out; assuming the maximum rate, a /22 can be > > issued to someone every two years, > r > > ather than once and done as with the other two RIRs. > > > > Given that the inventory currently contains one /9 and one /10, we are > getting close to the point where any additional set-asides will no longer > be possible, so I thought it might be worthwhile at least considering > whether the 4.10 pool ought to be enlarged while it still can be. . . > > > > Bill. > > _______________________________________________ > > PPML > > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN > > Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > > > > > -- > ================================================ > David Farmer Email: [email protected] > Office of Information Technology > University of Minnesota > 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815 > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: > 1-612-812-9952================================================ > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN > Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:29:16 +0000 > From: Leslie Nobile <[email protected]> > To: David Farmer <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" > <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] NRPM 4.10 - is a /10 large enough? > Message-ID: <cf85677c.20316%[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > To confirm, the /10 reserved for IPv6 transition and the /16 reserved for > micro-allocations are not included in the daily IPv4 inventory counter on > the ARIN homepage. > > Leslie > > > > On 4/29/14 2:23 PM, "David Farmer" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >If I'm not mistaken the reserved /10 for IPv6 deployment and /16 for > >micro-allocations is not included in the counter. Could staff confirm > >please. > > > >Further, there is an additional approximately /10 that will come from > >the IANA recovered address pool. I'm comfortable with this being > >reserved for special purposes, if we see fit. > > > >However, I'm not comfortable with reserving more out of the current free > >pool at this point. We are well past the point where making that kind > >of change can occur without causing potentially bad side effects. Any > >drastic change in what is available for normal allocations at this point > >is likely create a panic. > > > >We discussed this as a community, there were proposals to reserve larger > >chunks including the whole last /8 as RIPE and APNIC did. We chose this > >strategy. In some situations never is better than too late. > > > >My best advice is find your towel and DON'T PANIC! > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Panic_(The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_th > >e_Galaxy)#Knowing_where_one.27s_towel_is > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Panic_(The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_th > >e_Galaxy)#Don.27t_Panic > > > > > >Thanks > > > >On 4/29/14, 12:54 , Bill Owens wrote: > >> A couple of recent threads here and my general sense of the (lack of) > >>urgency around IPv6 deployment has made me wonder whether setting aside > >>a /10 under NRPM 4.10 - Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 > >>Deployment - is really going to be enough. I was looking at Geoff > >>Huston's graphs (http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/) and noticed that > >>both RIPE and APNIC, by coincidence, will be using up the first /10 out > >>of their reserved /8s at about the same time, near the end of this year. > >>A naive calculation says that APNIC will go through the /10 in about 3.5 > >>years, and RIPE in about 2.2 years. Of course it is difficult to predict > >>how the runout of the reserved /10 under 4.10 will look, but I think > >>it's reasonable to assume that it won't be any slower than 2-3 years, > >>since unlike RIPE and APNIC there's no limit to how much space an entity > >>can receive under 4.10, only the pace at which it can be handed out; > >>assuming the maximum rate, a /22 can be issued to someone every two > >>years, > > r > >> ather than once and done as with the other two RIRs. > >> > >> Given that the inventory currently contains one /9 and one /10, we are > >>getting close to the point where any additional set-asides will no > >>longer be possible, so I thought it might be worthwhile at least > >>considering whether the 4.10 pool ought to be enlarged while it still > >>can be. . . > >> > >> Bill. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> PPML > >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > >> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > >> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > >> > > > > > >-- > >================================================ > >David Farmer Email: [email protected] > >Office of Information Technology > >University of Minnesota > >2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815 > >Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952 > >================================================ > >_______________________________________________ > >PPML > >You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > >the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > >Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > >http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > >Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > > End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 106, Issue 56 > ****************************************** >
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
