On Mar 14, 2012, at 7:41 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:54 AM, ML <m...@kenweb.org> wrote: >> On 3/14/2012 2:22 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote: >>> >>> NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255 >>> CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10 >>> OriginAS: >>> NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED >>> >> >> >> Did IANA have to justify this space to ARIN or was it just given to them no >> questions asked because a draft RFC specified a need for a /10? > > see the discussion in PPML/arin-announce... my recollection is > something like this happened (paraphrased for the tl/dr crowd): > 1) someone wanted more 1918^H^H^Hshared-transition space > 2) a policy proposal came to ARIN's PP meeting > 3) the policy proposal ran around for a time making friends > 4) the proposal passed and the ARIN BoT essentially got a message from > IANA/IESG saying: > "Hey, before you leap... lookout, perhaps the IETF should weigh in?"
Well, actually, the ARIN board^H^H^H^H^HCEO went to IESG saying "mother may I" would be a more accurate description of the process. > 5) an IETF draft was drafted (which later had a baby... so there are 2 > versions/parts flying about) Actually, draft-weil was floated before the ARIN policy proposal IIRC. The other draft (draft-bdgks) came after, essentially in response to the statement by the ARIN board/CEO that getting the policy implemented would require IESG approval. > 6) the main draft was finalized and sent along to the RFC editor, and > made into a BCP > <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg09959.html> > 7) IANA received this /10 from ARIN Otherwise, yeah, I think that about sums it up. Owen
