[address-policy-wg] Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 allocation mechanisms by the IANA

At Wed, 5 Feb 2014 19:57:32 +0100,
Filiz Yilmaz wrote:
> 
> Dear Colleagues,

  Please see comments in context below.
 
> NRO NC is asked by the IANA Staff for a clarification on the reading of this policy, Global Policy for post exhaustion IPv4 allocation mechanisms by the IANA, in regards to "when" the first allocations from the Recovered IPv4 pool can be made. 
> 
> The Council decided to check further with the communities, hence this mail.
> 
> The policy document (http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-529) states the following:
> 
> ----
> 
> 1.0 Recovered IPv4 Pool
> 
> ….
> 
> When one of the RIRs declares it has less than a total of a /9 in its inventory, the Recovered IPv4 pool will be declared active, and IP addresses from the Recovered IPv4 Pool will be allocated as stated in Section 2.0 below.
> 
> 2.0 Allocation of returned IPv4 address space by the IANA
> 
> 1. Allocations from the IANA may begin once the pool is declared active.
> 2. In each "IPv4 allocation period", each RIR will receive a single “IPv4 allocation unit” from the IANA.
> 3. An "IPv4 allocation period" is defined as a 6-month period following 1 March or 1 September in each year
> 
> ...
> ----
> 
> While clause 1 seems to be pretty clear, it contains a "may" and clauses 2 and 3 together talk about "allocation periods" and that they are the “6-month period following 1 March or 1 September in each year.” 
> 
> In practice, if the pool is declared active on 1 January and IANA makes the first allocations immediately this would be outside of the allocation period, which begins at the start of March.
>  
> So mainly the question is about the first allocations from the the Recovered IPv4 pool; 
> 
> a) Should they be made straight away 
> or 
> b) Should IANA wait and make them at the start of the next "IPv4 allocation period," the "6-month period following 1 March or 1 September.
> 
> 
> In my personal opinion I see no problems with starting straight away (option a above), and then continue the rest in the regularity of the allocation periods as stated in the policy. 
> 
> Would you agree or is your reading towards option b above? 

  I agree with you, Filiz. Here is how I read the policy.

  Clause 3 makes no reference to whether the pool has already been
  declared active; it establishes the beginning of the current and
  subsequent allocation periods.  Whether or not the pool has been
  activated, we are now (5 Feb 2014) living in an activation period
  which began on 1 Sep 2013 and looking forward to another which will
  begin on 1 Mar 2014.

  In clause 1, the word "once" means "as soon as".  Here too, "may"
  simply indicates that the action is authorized in the circumstances
  mentioned; no complementary "or may not" option is to be inferred.

  Clause 4 provides that the allocation unit to be used in the
  allocation period during which the pool is declared active need not
  be calculated according to the conditions prevailing at the
  beginning of this allocation period, but rather according to the
  conditions current at the moment of activation.

  I hope this helps.

  Best regards,
  Niall O'Reilly