[ppml] Wording issues with the 2002-6 Aggregation Requests Pr oposal???

Bill Darte billd at cait.wustl.edu
Tue Dec 3 18:05:05 EST 2002

 Good point, but perhaps the remedy is that the initial request is without
audit of efficient use, but subsequent ones are...or...

Justification is required only when the exchange block is above a certain

A list of all space under control of the requester is reviewed upon request
to determine if this is the best aggregation possible (or

as my original question....... maybe the hassle associated with this policy
is such that the benefits are outweighed...... no response anywhere to that
one, but I'm guessing that a lot of people think there is value or this
proposal would not have gotten this far.....

Bill Darte

-----Original Message-----
From: Ron da Silva
To: ppml at arin.net
Sent: 12/3/02 3:57 PM
Subject: Re: [ppml] Wording issues with the 2002-6 Aggregation Requests Pr

On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 03:45:02PM -0600, Bill Darte wrote:
> In the first place, you would not be able to return 12 a second time,
> because you would return the original 12 for a single aggregated block
> would no longer fit the criteria of the policy...no?

I suppose, if I had 12 /24s and they were "dirty" (whatever that means),
I could trade in 3 of them for a /22.  And then after some time, say
6 months, trade in that /22 along with another /24 for a /21.  etc..
I could have a decent amount of space by the time I am done.  Why not
require that in order to exercise this policy the request must come
from an ARIN member (which implies billing and justification are in
place) ?


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list