Internic address allocation policy (fwd)
JimFleming at unety.net
Tue Nov 19 22:03:05 UTC 1996
On Tuesday, November 19, 1996 7:54 AM, Brian Tackett[SMTP:cym at acrux.net] wrote:
@ So, my question is: What can we do to make it better? Not "What can Kim
@ Hubbard do to fix it", and not "What can those stupid ISP's do to fix it",
@ but what can both do collaboratively to work out a consistent method of
@ doing things, and making sure that it's well known to both new existing
@ providers of network solutions.
I would suggest the following for starters...
1. ALL* proposed IP allocations (and transfers) should be published
in a well-known public place and some public comment
period should be set before the allocations are made.
2. More NICs should be created. The original NSF contracts called
for General Atomics to be the NIC of NICs. This concept
has been lost and most of the power is in the hands of
a too few people.
3. ALL of the NICs should vote on whether the allocations should
be made. The result of these votes should be recorded
with the public information above. As the number of NICs
is increased, via #2, then more voices will be heard.
4. Some sort of Board or approval body, drawn from Industry
groups should be developed as an appeals body
should the vote in #3 not go the way someone or some
company prefers. This would be a last resort sort of step.
5. All meetings** between the NICs should be publicized and
anyone should be allowed to attend. The meeting
agenda should be readily available as well as the
6. A complete and detailed accounting with allocation
percentages should be posted on a well-known
public web site. This will allow everyone to see
precisely where allocations stand in the IPv4
address space and what a small percentage of
the space has been allocated to ISPs, while huge
blocks are "reserved" for unknown purposes.
7. A complete review of /8 allocations should be done
with a complete audit of how the companies
that have those allocations are utilizing those
blocks (as well as other blocks). The CEOs and
shareholders of those companies should be
informed that their past policies may not conform
to modern standards of frugal allocations.
8. More emphasis should be placed on IP Address Ecology
and people should be rewarded and/or awarded
for their actions via public forums and peer support.
* ALL means ALL - Even the private, behind the scenes, allocations
made by the IANA, such as the @Home allocation which was not
made based on SWIP information. How could it be? They did not even
have customers, just a lot of venture capital and the "right" people
on their staff.
** The people involved in the following meeting could start by
Kim Hubbard met with Jon Postel (IANA), David Conrad (APNIC) and
Daniel Karrenberg (RIPE) in California to discuss IP issues.
UNETY Systems, Inc.
JimFleming at unety.net
JimFleming at unety.net.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)
More information about the NANOG