[arin-ppml] [Fwd: ARIN-prop-131: Section 5.0 Legacy Addresses - revised ver. 3] revised ver. 4
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Jeffrey Lyon
> <jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net> wrote:
>> This is a shot in left field, but considering that much of the legacy
>> space is /24 would there be any interest in requiring that legacy
>> space be collected but not reissued until it can be fully or
>> sufficiently aggregated?
> I don't think so. If I did, I would be happy to include it. My feeling
> is that there will be demand and a /24 will be more useful immediately
> than later. We could end up with orphans never able to be rejoined.
> The proposal to support in that interest, IMHO, would be the globally
> coordinated transfer proposal.
My personal feeling is that the remaining or reclaimed space should be
reserved for current ARIN members using IPv4 and in most of those
cases a /24 by itself isn't of much use.
Does anyone else think that new members should be required to request
IPv6 or piggyback off current IPv4 customers?
Jeffrey Lyon, Leadership Team
jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net | http://www.blacklotus.net
Black Lotus Communications - AS32421
First and Leading in DDoS Protection Solutions