Not Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Wed Mar 16 16:43:28 UTC 2022


> On Mar 15, 2022, at 19:23 , Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 16 Mar 2022, at 02:54, Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog at 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 rather than dealing with squatters and out-of-date ACLs both of which are self-inflicted by one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 <abscoco at 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, <bzs at 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=nanog at bakker.net (Niels Bakker) wrote:
>>>> * bzs at theworld.com (bzs at 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    | bzs at 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: marka at isc.org
> 



More information about the NANOG mailing list