[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2010-13: Permitted Uses of space reserved under NRPM 4.10

William Herrin bill at herrin.us
Sat Aug 7 23:44:37 EDT 2010

On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> On Aug 7, 2010, at 5:14 PM, Scott Leibrand wrote
> > On Wed 8/4/2010 2:23 PM, ARIN wrote:
> >> 3. All prior 4.10 allocation/assignments must be at least 90% utilized.
> >
> > Is there any reason to limit this requirement to just 4.10 allocations
> > and assignments?
> I think it is infeasible to put a 90% requirement on pre-4.10 allocations and
> assignments unless we changed some of the mechanisms for counting
> utilization. I think this could place an undue burden on some providers as
> it would represent a radical ex-post-facto shift in the way they've allocated
> addresses to their customers prior to runout.

Hi Owen,

I think Scott's point is: if they haven't consumed 90% of their
existing allocations, do they genuinely -need- addresses from the 4.10
pool? If they do, I haven't been convinced of why.

Ex post facto has to do with retroactive effect. There's no change
here to folks have to do to retain, transfer, etc. any addresses
outside the pool reserved for 4.10.


William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list