[ppml] What do we do with 2002-6?

Bill Darte billd at cait.wustl.edu
Fri Feb 28 12:28:03 EST 2003

The wordings (far) below represent the original and a proposed re-wording of
the 2002-6 Policy Proposal: Aggregation Requests

The spirit of this proposal I believe to be associate with eliminating
separate blocks under the control of a single authority to provide for
better address aggregation and address allocation efficiencies. 

Objections to this policy proposal range from... it solves a problem no one
is concerned with, it will be used to 'launder' tainted blocks.........  

Questions have been asked about the 'scope of the problem' and the likihood
that this proposal will find a sympathetic audience.... In other words, will
people be motivated to act under this policy in sufficient numbers to
warrant such a process.

Others who think the proposal is worthwhile take issue with the time
allotted for renumbering... with a range being addressed in the reworded

Still others were concerned about the block sizes to be aggregated may scale
to a size that allowed the 'next bit' to represent an 'un-justified
give-away' of address space..... that is... if one returns 3 /24s they will
get a /22........ the equivalent of 4 /24s......... as the block sizes
increase in this scenario, the give-away gets more onerous......As such,
'justification' of the blocks size to be distributed comes under

Justification almost always leads to the red-herring of ARIN doing address

At this point in the discuission someone again brings up the question of
whether this proposal is worth pursuing.....

I am now bringing this very question back to the ppml............. what's
your suggestion?...... word smith the existing proposal and bring it back to
ARIN XI in Memphis (please offer suggested verbage)?.... drop the proposal
altogether?...... some other alternative that you would like to propose?


If an organization, whether a member or non-member, ISP or end-user,
relinquishes a group of portable, non-aggregatable address blocks to
ARIN, they shall be allowed to receive a block in exchange, /24 or
shorter, but no more than the shortest block that could contain all of
the returned blocks.  Exchanged space shall be returned within 12
months.  For example, if an organization relinquished three /24s, they
should be allowed to take either a /24, a /23, or a /22 in exchange. If
all of the previous address blocks were maintained in the ARIN database
without maintenance fees, the replacement space shall be as well, but if
any one of the returned blocks had associated maintenance fees, then the
replacement block shall also be subject to maintenance fees.

Proposed rewording....

If any organization relinquishes a group of portable, non-aggregatable
address blocks to ARIN, they shall receive a block in exchange.  Exchange
blocks will be of sufficient size to contain the space of all returned
blocks without justification up to /17.  Exchange blocks of greater than /17
will require justification of address useage per existing ARIN requirements
for addtional address allocations.  Exchange blocks larger than /20 must be
renumbered within 12 months; all others must be renumbered within 6 months.
If ALL returned blocks were maintained by ARIN without maintenance fees, the
exchange block will also be maintained without fee.

Other alternatives?

Bill Darte
ARIN Advisory Council 

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list