[address-policy-wg] Vanity address allocations and the end of IPv4

On 29 Mar 2010, at 12:35, Shane Kerr wrote:

> * I support allowing people to request specific unused resources

Of course. Unused resources are there to be used.

> * I hope that can be done without a policy change

By that I hope you don't mean that the NCC does some fancy footwork  
around the current policies to give an LIR the particular address  
block they want. It is extremely important now that we're in the end- 
game for IPv4 that the current non-discriminatory policies based on  
technical need are followed. If there is a new requirement for  
allocating the remaining resources -- eg vanity addresses -- that  
simply has to go through the policy making process. IMO it would be  
very unwise to tinker with these policies for non-technical reasons as  
IPv4 runs out.

Very Bad Things will happen if the RIRs allocate resources in ways  
that violate our policies. Or there's a suggestion that the current  
rules are not being followed. Or a suspiciion that needs-based  
allocation no longer applies. Governments, regulators and competition  
authorities are going to be paying special attention to what RIRs do  
with the remaining IPv4 space. So it's essential that there's not even  
a hint of the RIRs treating allocation requests differently by  
applying criteria which are not part of the current policies.

The week before last, the ITU had a meeting where they discussed the  
possibility of becoming an RIR. [Some of the motivations for that  
included "fairness towards developing countries", "reduced cost" and  
"addressing the imblance of IPv4 allocations." Sigh.] If the RIRs are  
suspected of bending their own policies, this will give ammunition to  
those who say that these Internet people are not to be trusted --  
"See! They ignore their own rules/processes or make them up as they go  
along!" -- and it's time for the ITU to step in and provide adult  
supervision.

As far as getting the block containing 2.2.2.2 goes, I think the way  
forward should be for the LIR to keep an eye out for when that block  
is about to be allocated, submit a template at the appropriate point  
and take their chances. IIUC this is what some folk have sort of done  
with AS numbers. I have heard of people who monitor the RIR databases  
and watch for "interesting" ASNs to be handed back.
When such a number is returned to the RIR, they then submit a template  
for a new ASN and hope it gets allocated the one that was just returned.