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

Barbara Roseman broseman at ix.netcom.com
Wed Dec 4 16:36:10 EST 2002

At 07:16 AM 12/4/2002 -0600, Bill Darte wrote:
>Proposed..... (Bill Darte rewording)
>If any organization relinquishes a group of portable, non-aggregatable
>address blocks to ARIN, they will receive a block in exchange.  The block
>received in exchange shall be /24 or shorter, but not shorter than need be
>in order to contain all of the returned blocks. Exchanged space shall be
>returned within 12 months.  If all of the previous address blocks were
>maintained in the ARIN database without maintenance fees, then replacement
>space will be without fee, but if any one of the returned blocks had
>associated maintenance fees, then the replacement block will also be subject
>to maintenance fees appropriate to the replacement block size.  For example,
>if an organization relinquished three /24s, they would eligible to receive a
>/24, a /23, or a /22 in exchange.
>Is the "non-aggregatable" reference above (and in the original wording) not
>explicit enough?

Oops, my bad. I didn't read your version with enough attention, I got 
caught up in some replies that seemed to indicate the wording wasn't there.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list