[1813] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Michael Dillon)
Fri Feb 2 14:44:35 1996
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 11:27:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Michael Dillon <michael@memra.com>
To: Bill Manning <bmanning@isi.edu>
cc: Nick Hilliard <nh@ireland.eu.net>, bmanning@isi.edu, jon@branch.com,
curtis@ans.net, jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu, G.Huston@aarnet.edu.au,
asp@uunet.uu.net, cidrd@iepg.org, iesg@isi.edu, local-ir@ripe.net,
nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199602021407.AA25614@zephyr.isi.edu>
On Fri, 2 Feb 1996, Bill Manning wrote:
> > There must be some mechanism implemented whereby address space will return
> > to the IANA after a specified period of time unless otherwise requested by
> > the prefix holder.
>
> There were a couple of methods suggested here:
>
> preemptive hijacking -
> voluntary return -
> periodic fees -
>
> Hijacking has a number of interesting problems
> Periodic fees will take a year or more to implement
> Voluntary return can be done -now-.
>
> Which method is the least stressfull and has reasonable impact
> on the existing routing table crunch?
You don't neccessarily need addresses returned to solve routing table
crunch. If contact with the address owner really is impossible, then they
are not using the addresses on the global Internet and therefore their
addresses can be aggregated with other live addresses. The best way to do
this would be to move all live addresses out of the block and just drop
the whole block for the time being.
Of course this means that other people would need to renumber into more
router-friendly prefixes but that's what PIER is all about.
Michael Dillon Voice: +1-604-546-8022
Memra Software Inc. Fax: +1-604-546-3049
http://www.memra.com E-mail: michael@memra.com
