[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> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Jeffrey Lyon
> <jeffrey.lyon at> 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.
> Best,
> -M<

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 |
Black Lotus Communications - AS32421
First and Leading in DDoS Protection Solutions