Re: IPv6 will never fly: ARIN continues to kill it

Thus spake "Iljitsch van Beijnum" <iljitsch(_at_)muada(_dot_)com>
> On 20-sep-2007, at 18:33, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> > ARIN's counsel has told ARIN that it is unclear if they have legal 
> > standing to revoke legacy assignments.
> First of all, litigation isn't the only way to get something done,  and 
> second, do don't know that until you try.
If you try to revoke someone's /8 or /16, you can bet that they're going to 
sue you.
> We did see 46/8 come back earlier this year, but unless I'm
> mistaken, that was the first legacy /8 to be returned this century.
Return is different than revocation.  ARIN is working on policy changes that 
would encourage/incent voluntary return, as well as community outreach.
> > And, for the record, there are over 50,000 of them, not less than
> > 50.
Clarification: 31,386 in ARIN's region.  I haven't seen stats for the other 
RIRs.
> 50000 organizations holding nearly 0.5% of the IPv4 space each?
> I'm impressed! With that kind of address compression technology
> we don't need IPv6 after all.
I'm sure you're aware that different size assignments were made to different 
organizations.
> > Also, projections show that even if we reclaimed _every_
> > legacy assignment (many of which are still in use and even
> > justified under current policy), it would only delay exhaustion
> > six months to a year; it is felt that doing so is not generally worth
> > the effort and would certainly cost an absurd amount in legal
> > fees, and the litigation is likely to last beyond the exhaustion
> > date anyways (with no solid guess as to who would win in the
> > end).
> I mostly agree with that, but a few years ago it looked like  reclaiming, 
> say, half of the legacy /8s would buy us 2 - 5 extra  years of IPv4 
> lifetime and there was enough time to do it at that  point.
Even if true, that point is past.  Based on current projections, it is 
unlikely we'd be able to recover _any_ /8s before exhaustion hits due to the 
protracted litigation that would ensue, and even if we did manage to get 
some of them back (which isn't guaranteed, and would cost millions of 
dollars in any case), it wouldn't have a material effect.  We're going to 
run out in a few years no matter what we do, the DFZ is going to explode 
because big ISPs will be getting e.g. hundreds of /20s instead of a single 
/12 for each request, and IPv6 still won't be deployed and usable in any 
meaningful way unless we make more progress in the next two years than we 
have in the last ten.
> Same thing for repurposing 240/4, by the way.
Decade problem.  Come back and discuss that when Windows recognizes that 
block as normal unicast addresses by default.
> > The situation is different with v6 because all PI assignments
> > are subject to a contract that allows ARIN to revoke them at
> > any time with a policy change. If a viable alternative emerged,
> > ARIN could stop making new PI assignments, deprecate the
> > existing ones, and drop them after a few years' transition
> > period.
> I don't believe that for one second. Maybe the RIRs have
> contracts with all new PI holders, but that doesn't automatically
> give ARIN the authority to reclaim address space after a policy
> change.
Again, I don't know about all RIRs, but that is _explicitly called out_ in 
ARIN's Registration Services Agreement and AFAIK has been since day one.
That, in fact, is one of the many reasons that the legacy holders do not 
want to join the RIRs: they believe that their addresses can't be revoked 
as-is but they could be if they signed an RSA.
> I don't know of a precedent of any RIR EVER reclaiming ANY
> address space without the cooperation of the holder, despite
> the holder not complying with policies.
ARIN does so today on a regular basis for certain reasons.  There is a 
proposal that would grant them more policy authority to do so in more cases. 
The language enabling such policy is in the RSA.
> As a non-lawyer, I would judge the chances in court for
> reclaiming IPv4 /8s higher than those for reclaiming IPv6 PI
> space: in the first case, it's the benefit the continued operation
> of the IPv4 internet, in the latter case, it's going to look highly
> arbitrary.
I'd suggest you review the comments by ARIN's counsel at the last meeting 
WRT revoking legacy assignments.  It's more complicated than it appears at 
first glance, particularly to someone not used to our legal system.
S

Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking 


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf