[arin-ppml] Legacy space holders were a big part of the community... i.e. all of it.

[John Santos]

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, John Santos wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, John Curran wrote:

[snip]

> > 
> > It is a very relevant point, since almost all of those same legacy
> > holders were certainly part of the consensus decision in 1993 to
> > change the basic IP address structure to allow variable sized
> > blocks (aka "CIDR") and the matching matching address allocation
> > policies (RFC1466/RFC1518/RFC1519).  These documents state that
> > an organization should receive sufficient address space to meet
> > two years worth of organization need, so that we could "delay
> > depletion of the IP address space".
> > 
> > The community of the legacy space allocation era actually already
> > reached consensus years ago that variable-sized blocks were needed
> > and that organizational allocations based on two years of need were
> > most appropriate. They just forgot to return their own extra space,
> > for reasons unknown, and at this point are best off if they can
> > simultaneously deny that they were part of the community that were
> > involved in these decisions but somehow were still part of the team
> > that earned their legacy allocation by helping build the Internet...
> > good luck with that.
> 
> You are assuming that legacy holders are hanging on to "extra"

Left out an "all" here...  Oops.  Should be "that all legacy holders..."


> space and refusing to return it.  That is certainly not the case.
> 

I suspect that some legacy holders might be doing that, but object
to *all* of us being tarred with the same brush, and object to
any policies being adopted that assume ill-intent or hoarding on
the part of *all* legacy holders.

> As an existence proof, I am a legacy holder and am using most of
> my space.  (As of today, 134 of 256 addresses staticly allocated,
> plus a bunch of DHCP space.)

[snip]


-- 
John Santos
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
781-861-0670 ext 539