[124588] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: legacy /8
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Fri Apr 2 18:16:11 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <v2q443de7ad1004021416q8d2481dby982127e76a7a237@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 15:14:33 -0700
To: Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Apr 2, 2010, at 2:16 PM, Chris Grundemann wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 15:01, Jeroen van Aart <jeroen@mompl.net> wrote:
>> I am curious. Once we're nearing exhausting all IPv4 space will there ever
>> come a time to ask/demand/force returning all these legacy /8 allocations?
> <snip>
>
> Legacy vs RIR allocated/assigned space is not a proper distinction,
> in-use vs not-in-use is a much better defining line for this debate.
>
True, but...
> Folks have been asked to return unused space for quite some time now,
> see https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1917.
>
Also true.
> Unless/until governments get involved, there is no one to demand or
> force the return of any space. If that happens, we likely all lose.
>
This is where Legacy vs. RIR becomes meaningful. Legacy holders have
no contractual obligation to return unused space. RIR recipients, on the
other hand, do.
Owen
