[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 124: Clarification of Section

Hannigan, Martin marty at akamai.com
Wed Dec 8 12:02:36 EST 2010

On 12/7/10 7:28 PM, "John Curran" <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

[ snip ]

> I will note that in the case of this particular language, any ISP who
> only receives a 3 month allocation can come back (after 3 months with
> 2010-1 implemented) and qualify for additional space if they still
> need additional resources and such are available.  Given that the
> purpose of 2009-8 was to provide for equitable distribution post IANA
> depletion, suppressing the 3 month limit for allocations actually made
> after IANA runout simply because they are already the queue is likely
> to only encourage submissions today of not-quite-complete "placeholder"
> additional space requests to the queue, and similar attempts at gaming
> of the system.  This should not dissuade the ARIN AC for considering
> a policy change if they feel the current policy is flawed; it is only
> provided as insight into a implementation concern that arises from
> changing the process for existing requests in the queue at runout.

The proposal has "some" language to address placeholders:

" Any pending request submitted prior to that moment will continue to be
eligible for a twelve month supply of addresses as long as need is
established within thirty days of that moment."

The language around need could be improved to tighten that up further if
warranted. The time extension is to provide for staff questions and
applicant responses such as requesting additional justification related
specifically to what was provided and not for time to develop need.

I do see a problem with an entity sending ARIN an incomplete application.
The intent of the proposal is to apply it to bona-fide resource applications



More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list