[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2009-1: Transfer Policy - Revised andforwarded to the Board
scottleibrand at gmail.com
Wed May 6 23:59:31 EDT 2009
I just re-read the ISP and end-user sections of the NRPM, and both
require 80% usage of ALL previous allocations. Can you clarify whether
you were referring to the NRPM, operational practice, or something else?
On May 6, 2009, at 8:22 PM, "Michael K. Smith - Adhost" <mksmith at adhost.com
>> Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>>>> Rather than helping the problem the fact that this market is
>>>> being discussed is exactly what is causing the hoarding.
>>> I have to cry foul with this. There's been implications
>>> of hoarding on this list and in the last meeting but I have only
>>> seen a single allegation posted on this list of an illigitimate
>>> IPv4 holding, and that was a year ago. (and it wasn't a hoarding
>> If hoarding includes large netblocks (mainly /16s) that are not used
>> not needed I can name several, and even a cursory audit will show
>>> Since true hoarding implies false data submitted for an IPv4
>> This may be a source of confusion. Hoarding does not imply false
>> submitted for an IPv4.
>> Roger Marquis
> I would argue that the present state of things actually facilitates
> hoarding, given that only the last allocation is assessed as part of
> allocation of the next. Any previous allocations could be unused,
> barely used or used less. Thus, you can hoard addresses by only
> assigning from your last allocation and still be playing strictly by
> Sadly, the concept of having to justify all of your allocations to get
> your next one doesn't seem to get much traction.
> 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:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML