RE: Internic address allocation policy (fwd)

[Jim Fleming <JimFleming () unety net>]

On Tuesday, November 19, 1996 7:54 AM, Brian Tackett[SMTP:cym () acrux net] wrote:
@ 
<snip>
@ 
@ 
@ So, my question is: What can we do to make it better? Not "What can Kim
@ Hubbard do to fix it", and not "What can those stupid ISP's do to fix it",
@ but what can both do collaboratively to work out a consistent method of
@ doing things, and making sure that it's well known to both new existing
@ providers of network solutions.
@ 

I would suggest the following for starters...

        1. ALL* proposed IP allocations (and transfers) should be published
                in a well-known public place and some public comment
                period should be set before the allocations are made.

        2. More NICs should be created. The original NSF contracts called
                for General Atomics to be the NIC of NICs. This concept
                has been lost and most of the power is in the hands of
                a too few people.

        3. ALL of the NICs should vote on whether the allocations should
                be made. The result of these votes should be recorded
                with the public information above. As the number of NICs
                is increased, via #2, then more voices will be heard.

        4. Some sort of Board or approval body, drawn from Industry
                groups should be developed as an appeals body
                should the vote in #3 not go the way someone or some
                company prefers. This would be a last resort sort of step.

        5. All meetings** between the NICs should be publicized and
                anyone should be allowed to attend. The meeting
                agenda should be readily available as well as the
                meeting notes.

        6. A complete and detailed accounting with allocation
                percentages should be posted on a well-known
                public web site. This will allow everyone to see
                precisely where allocations stand in the IPv4
                address space and what a small percentage of
                the space has been allocated to ISPs, while huge
                blocks are "reserved" for unknown purposes.

        7. A complete review of /8 allocations should be done
                with a complete audit of how the companies
                that have those allocations are utilizing those
                blocks (as well as other blocks). The CEOs and
                shareholders of those companies should be
                informed that their past policies may not conform
                to modern standards of frugal allocations.

        8. More emphasis should be placed on IP Address Ecology
                and people should be rewarded and/or awarded
                for their actions via public forums and peer support.


* ALL means ALL - Even the private, behind the scenes, allocations
made by the IANA, such as the @Home allocation which was not
made based on SWIP information. How could it be? They did not even
have customers, just a lot of venture capital and the "right" people
on their staff.

** The people involved in the following meeting could start by
documenting it.

@@@@  ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/imr/imr9610.txt

IP Support

     Kim Hubbard met with Jon Postel (IANA), David Conrad (APNIC) and
     Daniel Karrenberg (RIPE) in California to discuss IP issues.

@@@@@@

--
Jim Fleming
UNETY Systems, Inc.
Naperville, IL

e-mail:
JimFleming () unety net
JimFleming () unety net.s0.g0 (EDNS/IPv8)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -