[ppml] IPv4 Soft Landing - Discussion and Support/Non-SupportRequested

michael.dillon at bt.com michael.dillon at bt.com
Fri Oct 5 04:34:22 EDT 2007

> > Things do not necessarily scale
> > linearly and the hierarchical structure of IPv4 
> sub-allocation makes 
> > 100% allocation impossible for anyone to attain.
> As mentioned in a previous note, ARIN staff have told me 
> explicitly that 100% utilization of previous allocations is 
> an existing requirement.

That does not change the fact that 100% utilization is technically
impossible. That's probably why the existing practice is to only audit
the last allocation for 80% utilization and ignore all previous

> > IPv6 infrastructure. I would not be opposed to a policy 
> that bundled a 
> > bunch of such actions along with a phased deployment plan.
> So what parts do you not agree with?

Not particularly relevant. I am opposed to the whole policy, not just
because it has bad parts, but because it is too big, too overreaching,
and has too many implications to properly evaluate in the short amount
of time between the submission of the proposal and the meeting.

--Michael Dillon

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list