[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Equitable Distribution of IPv4 Resources before IPv4 Run out

[Owen DeLong]

I oppose the "equitable distribution" policy because I don't believe
it will create equitable distribution.

However, I do support the idea of preserving a certain amount of
space to be allocated as direct assignments/allocations strictly for
transitional purposes.  We now have a policy proposal for that
which Matt and I are shepherding.

I think that there needs to be a certain amount of space set aside to
support transitional technologies or we may end up with a catch-22
in the end-game.

Owen


On Jun 6, 2008, at 4:49 PM, Stacy Hughes wrote:

> I agree with Martin.
> While it seems to me that large ISPs are vilified for requiring more  
> space than smaller organizations, I need to speak to the fact that  
> they provide space to downstream customers who will _never_ qualify  
> for PI space.  We must not forget the true little guys - the /29  
> customers, the /28 customers - that large ISPs provide space for.   
> This policy could effectively cheat the itty bitty guys out of  
> legitimately needed business resources.
> I continue to support an organic depletion of the free pool without  
> complication by policy specifically designed to control that process.
> Stacy
>
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Martin Hannigan <martin.hannigan at batelnet.bs 
> > wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael K. Smith - Adhost" <mksmith at adhost.com>
> To: "Scott Leibrand" <sleibrand at internap.com>,
> <arin-ppml at arin.net>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Equitable
> Distribution of IPv4 Resources before IPv4 Run out
> Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 16:26:19 -0700
>
> > Hello Scott:
> >
> > I'm working on a basis assumption that Extra Large
> > organizations request more addresses more frequently than
> > any of the other groups.  So, if allocations proceed
> > organically with the last IANA allocation, there is a high
> > likelihood that all of the last allocation will go to the
> > Extra Large organizations alone.
>
> Which will also filter down to other smaller guys, no? The
> larger networks are fulfilling their needs so that they can
> continue to grow their networks and their customers
> networks. Theoretically, all that would happen is that
> "smaller guys" with PI would have to resort to asking for
> "PA". All considered, that's better than getting nothing  or
> stifling growth of others. Seems most fair to allow the
> system to operate on a needs basis right to the end, IMHO.
>
>
> Best,
>
> -M<
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the  
> ARIN Public Policy
> Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net  
> if you experience any issues.
>
>
>
> -- 
> :):)
> /S
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the  
> ARIN Public Policy
> Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net  
> if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20080607/553cc061/attachment.htm>