[arin-ppml] Draft Policy 2010-1: Waiting List for Unmet IPv4 Requests

[Steve Bertrand]

Scott Leibrand wrote:
> On 1/28/2010 7:18 AM, michael.dillon at bt.com wrote:
>>
>> I gather you would rather see a system where people apply to
>> ARIN once, demonstrate their need once, and get their choice
>> of whatever addresses are on the shelf,
>> or a chit to be used when they find addresses in the market,
>> or a place in a waiting list for reclaimed addresses on the shelf,
>> or some combination of the three.
>>
>> Let's see, little ISP needs a /22 and applies to ARIN. They are
>> approved but there is only one /24 on the shelf. Little ISP
>> says, we'll take it, plus a chit for another /24, plus a place
>> in the queue for two more /24s. If they are unhappy with the
>> results of their market search, ARIN lets them exchange the
>> chit for another place in the queue, behind their original
>> queue postion for two /24s.
>>    
> 
> That's similar to what I'm proposing, but 2010-1's process is actually
> slightly simpler: the ISP can either take the /24, and go away for 3
> months, or they can get in line for a /22 or a /23.  They can't be in
> multiple places in multiple lines, so "place in the queue" and "chit"
> reduce to the exact same thing.
> 
>> That could work. How could it be done with a simple policy that
>> doesn't overmanage the situation?
>>    
> 
> Please feel free to write it up, so we can do a direct apples-to-apples
> comparison.  Or, if you prefer, feel free to point out which parts of
> 2010-1 are overly complicated and should be simplified or eliminated.

Why not remove the clause language entirely, get rid of all queues, and
just state that the requester can take the largest block available that
is smaller than what can be justified at the current time, if what they
request is not currently available.

Then, no coming back for three months...period. If they want to hold out
and re-apply each week, fine. Either ARIN has the block shelved, or they
don't.

If the policy was as such, would this not a) alleviate administration
overhead, and b) force networks to really evaluate where they can recoup
space from, if they need it that badly?

I mean, we're talking about /22 and less here from what I can tell.

There was a lot of feedback (on and off list) to my recent posts that
brought human nature into the picture, as well as the non-desire for
both added ARIN administration and/or having to have the community
consent to each alloc/assignment. I completely understand both points.

How do people feel about getting rid of all of that, and just making it
clear as to what people will get when the time comes, without any line
to wait in? It would save one heck of a lot of overhead from ARIN's
perspective.

Steve