Re: [sig-policy] prop-085: Eligibility for critical infrastructure assig
Thanks for bringing up this question.
First, theoretically, according to the definitions, allocation is for the purpose of sub-allocate,
assignment is for specific use within an ISP or end-user's infrastructure.
Of course, practically, people may not make that strict distinction.
So, the second reason, in order to receive the /22 allocation in the final /8,
they must meet the allocation criteria,
TLD account holders may not be able to justify an /22 or even /23 requirement.
So they are not eligible to receive alloaction from the final /8.
That's why we want to make the adjustment.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip Smith" <pfs at cisco dot com>
To: "Policy SIG" <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
Sent: Monday, August 16, 2010 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-085: Eligibility for critical infrastructure assignments from the final /8
> Hi Terence, Wendy,
>> prop-085-v001: Eligibility for critical infrastructure assignments from
>> the final /8
>> Authors: Terence Zhang Yinghao <zhangyinghao at cnnic dot cn>
>> Wendy Zhao Wei <zhaowei at cnnic dot cn>
>> Version: 1
>> Date: 22 July 2010
>> 1. Introduction
>> This policy proposal seeks to make it possible for critical
>> infrastructure account holders (such as new ccTLDs or gTLDs) to receive
>> portable IPv4 assignments from the final /8 space.
>> In the spirit of the current final /8 policy , this proposal still
>> ensures each account holder is only eligible to receive one single
>> allocation OR assignment from the final /8 space.
>> 2. Summary of the current problem
>> Currently, critical infrastructure networks such as TLDs (Top Level
>> Domains) are eligible to receive portable IPv4 assignments under the
>> critical infrastructure policy .
>> But the current final /8 policy permits only allocations to account
>> holders to be made. This means that during the final /8 phase, it will
>> be impossible to make IPv4 addresses assignments to end users under
>> the critical infrastructure policy.
> Why can't the TLDs receive address space under the existing final /8 policy?
> Is the problem is that they don't want to become an APNIC account holder?
> Surely they could just receive an allocation like everyone else and use
> that allocation for their own network infrastructure? (ISPs who are LIRs
> do that right now - they don't get a separate assignment to number their
> backbone, as far as I know anyway.)
> I'm just trying to understand what the actual problem is...
> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net