[ppml] Policy Proposal 2006-7: Changes to IPv6 initial allocation criteria - revised text

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Thu Feb 22 18:35:00 EST 2007

On Feb 21, 2007, at 10:41 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:

>>> I also question the commercial viability of an ISP that
>>> does not   offer IPv4
>>> services and plans to subsist for 5+ years on less than
>>> 200   customers who
>>> are so small they do not qualify for PI assignments.
>>> Asking the   ISP to make
>>> do with PA space (for the year or two it takes to
>>> deplete their VC   money) is
>>> not unreasonable.  And, if they do somehow survive, they
>>> will   qualify as
>>> "known" and be able to get an LIR allocation anyways.
>> Again, I don't see how that is relevant to ARIN policy.
>> If the ISP   is not commercially
>> viable, then, they will stop renewing their ARIN resources
>> and the   addresses
>> can be reclaimed (or, they will be absorbed by the
>> acquiring   entity).  Either
>> way, I don't see how ARIN should be passing judgment on
>> peoples business plans.
> That year or two is a risk buffer. Weakening or altogether
> removing start requirements increases the risk to the
> resources and the organization.

I don't buy it.  First, I don't know what you mean by 'risk to the  
and the organization'.  There really aren't any "risks" here.  Either  
business succeeds in which case the resources remain allocated, or,
the business fails in which case the resources can be reclaimed.
It's as simple as that.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20070222/12b780ce/attachment-0001.p7s>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list