[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 122: Reserved Pool for FuturePolicy Development

Leave 4.10 space for what it is now for.
Establish, if need be, an adjunct policy that allows that pool to be raided for other uses if after a period of time 6, 9, 12 months indicates that it is not being effectively utilized.

-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at on behalf of Scott Leibrand
Sent: Wed 11/24/2010 6:14 PM
To: Hannigan, Martin
Cc: arin-ppml at
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 122: Reserved Pool for FuturePolicy Development
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Hannigan, Martin <marty at> wrote:
> On 11/24/10 11:53 PM, "Leo Bicknell" <bicknell at> wrote:
>> In a message written on Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 01:08:38PM -0800, Owen DeLong
>> wrote:
>>> Hence my suggestion that 122 would be more palatable if it set aside
>>> a separate /10 for that purpose rather than raiding 4.10.
>> I would not object to a second /10, but I'm sure I see it as necessary.
> It would only amplify the defects in 4.10.

So do you see the problem as being that 4.10 will leaving addresses
reserved for too long without putting them into use?

If so, would there be additional criteria for giving out 4.10 reserved
space that would alleviate the defects in 4.10 from your perspective?

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
Please contact info at if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>