Re: [aso-policy] RIR proposal

[Geoff Huston <gih@telstra.net>]

>         I'm all in favor of consultation and discussion. Its the
>         "only delegations to RIRs" that bothers me.  Where
>         would RFC 1918 space or the link-local delegations rest
>         if the IANA could not delegate to other than RIRs?
I'd like to respond to that question.

One can take the position, with some justification, that
the decisions in the example are not decision of delegation,
but are in effect an undertaking NOT to place such addresses
into the allocated address pool, and are in in fact an
ourtcome of a common policy NOT to delegate the address space.

I do not believe that these examples are contrary to the
RIR proposal, in that the RIR proposal addresses (ok - bad pun)
the process of address delegation.

The structure of the proposal is that IANA is the custodian of
the unallocated address space. The proposal is one that advocates
that the RIRs are the agents through which addresses are placed
into the public routing space through the assignment of
addresses to entities.


*       on-line archive: http://aso.icann.org/wilma-bin/wilma/aso-policy     *
*   To unsubscribe:  send "unsubscribe" to aso-policy-request@aso.icann.org  *