[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-14: Resource Review Process
Stephen Sprunk
stephen at sprunk.org
Wed Jul 25 15:44:50 EDT 2007
Thus spake "Bill Woodcock" <woody at pch.net>
> > 4. If the review shows that existing usage is substantially not in
> > compliance with current allocation and/or assignment policies,
> > the organization shall return resources as needed to bring them
> > substantially into compliance. If possible, only whole resources
> > shall be returned. Partial address blocks shall be returned in
> > such a way that the portion retained will comprise a single
> > aggregate block.
>
> How do you envision this working, in the case that someone is
> both lightly and sparsely using the space they've been allocated?
> That is, if someone is using the first and last addresses of a /22,
> would they be forced to renumber, in order to create a returnable
> /23 from one end or the other?
Presuming returning a /23 would be sufficient given how they're using the
/22, yes.
Consider a pathological case where someone has a /16 but is only using every
fourth /24. If they were allowed to return the parts they weren't using,
that'd result in a return of 64 /23s and 64 /24s, and they'd be forced to
advertise the remaining 64 /24s. That's bad for everyone -- including the
returning org. Odds are they wouldn't be able to get their /24s past
filters anyways, and the other /23s and /24s would be equally unusable if
ARIN tried to reassign them to someone else.
(Actually, I'd expect in that case they'd return 64 /23s and get to keep the
other unused 64 /24s, meaning they'd be advertising 64 /23s. That's
irrelevant, though, since they'd hit the same filters. Much better that
they renumber into one /17 and return the other.)
S
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list