Subject: [RRG] Re: address reclamation

From: RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:30:16 -0400

Earlier, Per wrote:
% How hard is it the internet registries to ask a statistically
% significant selection of their clients (LIRs) and known
% legacy-allocation holders if they're willing to give up some of
% their allocated blocks, how much of it, and on which conditions?
%
% They haven't even tried, ...

Actually, you have been unfair to the RIRs.
They have tried this.  I believe they continue to try this.

So far, they have been able to get several /8 blocks back from US DoD.
They also were able to get a /8 back from Stanford University.

This is all public information.  It was presented (at least) at the
last RIPE meeting held in Amsterdam.  I would guess the presentation
slides can be found online some place.

Ran

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg

---

From: Per Heldal <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 13:41:47 +0200

> They also were able to get a /8 back from Stanford University.

I'm aware of those efforts, and they are appreciated. Yet, numbers so
far are nowhere near anything that can make a real difference. 

> slides can be found online some place.

I followed it live (webcast) so I'm fully aware.

The "market survey" that I described that can give some indication of a
different future with potentially masses of reclaimed or re-sold space
is missing,

//per

---

From: Jason Schiller <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 08:25:50 -0400 (EDT)

Not only has the ARIN region attemped to reclaim legacy space, but the
ARIN membership has also tried to create policy to encourage legacy space
holders to return unused portions of space.  See policy porposal 
2007-17: Legacy Outreach and Partial Reclamation

http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2007_17.html

__Jason

==========================================================================
Jason Schiller                                               (703)886.6648
Senior Internet Network Engineer                         fax:(703)886.0512
Public IP Global Network Engineering                       [email-masked]
UUNET / Verizon                         [email-masked]

The good news about having an email address that is twice as long is that
it increases traffic on the Internet.

On Thu, 12 Jun 2008, RJ Atkinson wrote:

> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:30:16 -0400
> From: RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
> To: IRTF Routing RG <[email-masked]>
> Subject: [RRG] Re: address reclamation
> 
> Earlier, Per wrote:

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 11:36:13 +1200

> far are nowhere near anything that can make a real difference. 

With a total of well under 4 billion unicast IPv4 addresses and
a world population estimated as 6,673,801,375* today, I fail to see
why this would affect Internet architectural strategy anyway.
Address reclamation is at best a tactical solution, and at worst
will delay the real solution.

   Brian

* http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/popclockworld.html

---

From: Scott Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 07:21:23 -0400

> far are nowhere near anything that can make a real difference. 

It's moot.  Even if the RIRs could "reclaim" all unused addresses it
would only give us a matter of months, while bringing about a
significant increase in the number of routes carried in the core
earlier than the gray market will.

---

From: Xu Xiaohu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 20:01:37 +0800

> earlier than the gray market will.

Agree. In the last RIPE meeting in Berlin, there has been a lot of
discussion about the IP address reclamation and transfer which drew some
attention about the further growth in the routing table. The following is my
past msg about this concern. 
http://www.ops.ietf.org/lists/rrg/2008/msg01265.html

Here are the presentations on that RIPE meeting:
http://rosie.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-56/presentations/uploads/

Xiaohu XU