[sig-policy] Summary of discussion: prop-085 - redux

  • To: Policy SIG <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
  • Subject: [sig-policy] Summary of discussion: prop-085 - redux
  • From: Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com>
  • Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:06:00 +0900
  • Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
  • List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy>
  • List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
  • List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
  • List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
  • List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
  • List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
  • References: <4C735294.8070601@apnic.net>
  • User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/22.3 Mule/5.0 (SAKAKI)
      prop-085: Eligibility for critical infrastructure assignments from the
                 final /8
      Dear SIG members
      Below is a summary of discussions on the proposal to date. We encourage
      you to continue discussions on the mailing list before Thursday's Policy
      Randy, Ching-Heng, and Terence
      Proposal summary
      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.
      Discussion statistics
      Posted to Policy SIG mailing list:             22 July 2010
      Number of posts since proposal first posted:   36
      Number of people participating in discussions: 12
      Summary of discussion to date
      - It was asked why critical Internet infrastructure operators needed a
         special assignment policy and couldn't get an allocation under the
         existing final /8 policy.
         - It was explained that critical infrastructure may not be able to
           justify the initial /23 requirement for an allocation.
      - In response to questions from the community, it was reported that
         36.7% of has been assigned to critical infrastructure
         to date.
      - There were questions about whether it would still be possible to
         request critical infrastructure assignments from the designated block after the current final /8 policy is activated.
         - It was clarified that the reservation of was an
           operational decision and not specified in policy.
         - It was clarified that all previous allocation and assignment
           policies will be replaced by the final /8 policy when it is
         - It was suggested that any critical infrastructure assignments made
           after the final /8 policy was activitated should continue to be
           made from and form part of the final /8 worth of
           IPv4 address space. The reasons for this being:
           - Many operators have special routing policies for that block.
           - Given the low use of to date, it is unlikely that
             a new separate block from the final /8 will be needed.
      - There was discussion about the definition of what is critical Internet
         infrastructure and whether anything outside the root servers had a
         genuine need for IPv4 addresses in the final /8 phase.
      Full details of the proposal, including links to previous discussions,
      can be found at: