It’s a business problem for the RIR’s. Selling / leasing known defective products is against lots of consumer law. -- Mark Andrews
> On 17 Mar 2022, at 03:43, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > > >>> On Mar 15, 2022, at 19:23 , Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> On 16 Mar 2022, at 02:54, Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org> wrote: >>> >>> Having spent nearly 15 years on the ARIN Advisory Council, I think I’m able >>> to claim some detailed knowledge on the subject. >>> >>> In general, the RIRs themselves maintain neutrality about such things, >>> looking to their >>> respective communities for input on what to do. However, so long as the >>> IETF and >>> has not designated the space Unicast Address Space to be delegated to the >>> RIRs for allocation/assignment, IANA will not delegate it to the RIRs and >>> the RIRs >>> won’t, therefore, delegate it to users. >>> >>> If you really want to see this happen (and I still argue that the amount of >>> effort already wasted >>> discussing this idea vastly exceeds what would be needed towards IPv6 to >>> get beyond >>> caring about it), then the first step must be to convince the IETF to >>> designate the >>> space IPv4 Unicast and instruct the IANA to begin issuing those /8s to the >>> RIRs. >>> >>> Once that happens, the rest of the allocation process is basically >>> automatic. From a policy >>> perspective at the RIR level, it will be no different than say 4/8 or 1/8. >> >> Actually it would be fundamentally different to 4/8 or 1/8. You are looking >> at firmware upgrades >> rather than dealing with squatters and out-of-date ACLs both of which are >> self-inflicted by one >> of the parties. Routers and end devices that don’t know how to hand 240/4 >> are no self inflicted >> injuries. Issuing 4/8 or 1/8 worked for parties that had been following the >> rules. With 240/4 >> there where no rules to follow which results in RIR’s leasing known >> defective addresses. > > I was speaking from an RIR allocation perspective, NOT talking about the > technological hurdles > to implementation. > > I was specifically responding to someone’s question about how the RIRs would > be impacted by > this if it were to come to pass. > > I addressed your concern in the following paragraph as an aside, however. > >> >>> Now, convincing vendors to update their firmware, software, etc. is another >>> matter >>> and entirely outside of the control of the RIRs. Merchant compliance with >>> IETF standards >>> is generally considered useful, but it is entirely voluntary and even in >>> the best of >>> circumstances doesn’t every happen instantaneously and almost always >>> involves >>> some stumbles along the way. >>> >>> Owen >>> >>> >>>> On Mar 15, 2022, at 02:54 , Sylvain Baya <absc...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear NANOG-ers, >>>> Hope this email finds you in good health! >>>> Please see my comments below, inline... >>>> >>>> Le mardi 15 mars 2022, <b...@theworld.com> a écrit : >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Barry, >>>> Thanks for your email, brother! >>>> >>>> >>>> But the RIRs are the ones fielding requests for IPv4 space, and have >>>> some notion of how policy implementation might work in practice, so >>>> should have a lot of useful input. >>>> >>>> >>>> ...of course, it appears that RIRs have the opportunity >>>> to add their useful inputs, as Impact Analysis Report >>>> (IAR); during the Policy Development Process (PDP) >>>> initiated by the *appropriate* [1] Internet community. >>>> They explain it themselves here [2]. >>>> __ >>>> [1]: <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7020> >>>> [2]: <https://www.nro.net/accountability/rir-accountability/q-and-a/> >>>> >>>> Shalom, >>>> --sb. >>>> >>>> >>>> On March 14, 2022 at 00:45 niels=na...@bakker.net (Niels Bakker) wrote: >>>>> * b...@theworld.com (b...@theworld.com) [Mon 14 Mar 2022, 00:31 CET]: >>>>>> Personally I'd rather hear from the RIRs regarding the value or not >>>>>> of making more IPv4 space such as 240/4 available. They're on the >>>>>> front lines of this. >>>>> >>>>> You've got your policy development process diagram upside down. The >>>>> community decides what the RIRs implement. They're not in touch with >>>>> merchant silicon manufacturers. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- Niels. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> -Barry Shein >>>> >>>> Software Tool & Die | b...@theworld.com | >>>> http://www.TheWorld.com >>>> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD >>>> The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo* >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Best Regards ! >>>> __ >>>> baya.sylvain[AT cmNOG DOT cm]|<https://cmnog.cm/dokuwiki/Structure> >>>> Subscribe to Mailing List: <https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/> >>>> __ >>>> #LASAINTEBIBLE|#Romains15:33«Que LE #DIEU de #Paix soit avec >>>> vous tous! #Amen!» >>>> #MaPrière est que tu naisses de nouveau. #Chrétiennement >>>> «Comme une biche soupire après des courants d’eau, ainsi mon âme soupire >>>> après TOI, ô DIEU!»(#Psaumes42:2) >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> -- >> Mark Andrews, ISC >> 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia >> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org >> >
