[128641] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Lightly used IP addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Curran)
Fri Aug 13 17:21:12 2010
From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
To: "bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com" <bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com>, Randy
Bush <randy@psg.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 17:19:20 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20100813200658.GC8181@vacation.karoshi.com.>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org list" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Aug 13, 2010, at 4:06 PM, <bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com> wrote:
>=20
> my assertion to Owen was that his views would apply directly
> to the folks under a standard RSA. My reading of the
> LRSA suggests that ARIN has a much narrower remit on recovery
> of resources covered by that document. the third camp was/is
> a much thornier patch of ground, fraught w/ peril if ARIN
> takes action on recovery, at least imho. #4, well that sounds
> like fruitful ground for inter-RIR coordination.
>=20
> for example, if 75% of the total resource under ARIN administration
> is legacy, then 25% is covered by the standard RSA. Within the 75%,
> 6% of it is under LRSA and 15% of it is under the standard RSA.
>=20
> if this characterization is in ballpark, then Owens view on
> reclaimation only holds for ~30% of the resource under ARIN administrati=
on.
The LRSA provides specific rights which could very likely preclude
reclamation in some circumstances and result in the resources then
remaining as-is with address holder, i.e., this would still prevent=20
transfer contrary to the community policy but also prevent reissue.
(this occurs in the LRSA under some circumstances recognizing the=20
history of the legacy address space with the community).
Okay, to try and get some numbers back into the thread: From=20
Leslie's Registration Services report in Toronto, pages 6 and 9:
<https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_XXV/PDF/Wednesday/N=
obile_RSD.pdf>
First, I note that the 700 number I used from memory for number of=20
organizations was not correct; I gave the total signed, approved,=20
and pending. The number 444 signed is what corresponds to the 6%=20
under LRSA. Nicely, the actual numbers are in the report, so we see=20
6.49 /8 equivalents space under LRSA, out of the total legacy space=20
of 73 /8 equivalents (page 9). The RSA space is 33 /8 equivalents,
and total inventory is 106 /8 equivalents. (Randy, does this level
of reporting suffice for your purposes?)
So, recasting final numbers back to the original context:
63% (66.5/106) of the address space managed by ARIN is=20
Legacy-not-under-agreement, and ARIN's action with this space=20
is governed by the policies adopted by the community. ARIN=20
clearly could be in a difficult situation if policies adopted
needlessly result in impact to these legacy address holders.
6% (6.5/106) of the address space managed by ARIN is=20
Legacy-under-LRSA, and has specific contractual language which
may take precedence over community adopted policy (and could=20
both prevent transfers from completing and reclamation from=20
occurring).
31% (33/106) of the address space managed by ARIN is per-RSA,=20
and ARIN's action with this space is clearly governed by the=20
policies adopted by the community.
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN=
