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

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Wed Jan 27 19:10:10 EST 2010

George Bonser wrote:
>> What if the request is for a /14, and the biggest free blocks are all
>> /24s?  Do you want to give out 1024 non-aggregatable /24s to meet
> their
>> need for a /14?  Or should they be offered a single /24 from the free
>> pool, and given the option to get their /14 via transfer?  The latter
>> is
>> the outcome this policy would prefer, as it reduces fragmentation of
>> the
>> IPv4 address space, and allows available blocks to be matched with a
>> larger number of equivalent-sized requests, rather than having them
> all
>> vacuumed up by a small number of large requests.
> Which brought to mind something that is related.  I have not been on
> this list very long. Has there been discussion of some mechanism for
> recovery of issued but unused resources?  By this I mean address blocks
> that are no longer in use because the company involved no longer exists
> or blocks that have never been put into service.  A check of ipv4 PI
> blocks that have been issued but not advertized on the Internet for more
> than a year might be a place to start.
> I say this because I recently realized that a company I once worked for
> which had gone out of business still had a block of addresses and an ASN
> assigned to them so I contacted ARIN in order that the resources could
> be recovered for reuse.  But I can't help but wonder how large a pool
> exists of allocated but unused resources.

We don't know, this is why the NRPM has section 3.6.1 which is currently
pending implementation - basically the ARIN staff is figuring out how
to do it.  They have sent many mails out already and it's my 
understanding that they have discovered a lot of abandoned stuff as
well as a lot of stuff in use that has stale data on it - which is
being corrected as they inform holders.

So far there has been one presentation from ARIN staff on this effort
which boiled down to (in my humble opinion) a statement that the
task was way, way larger than they figured it would be.  I should
add as one of the 4 authors of that policy my surprise was that the
ARIN staff DIDN'T think it would be a monumental task.

The AC basically gave them a year to figure something out.  I personally 
wrote an outline of how I thought they should be going about doing it 
(ie: go after the low hanging fruit first) but I never heard back as to 
the results.  The discussion on the mailing list that proceeded from
the policy proposal also had plenty of ideas as well on how to go about
doing it.

They probably are not too pleased with me though, as I initiated this
back in Aug 2008 with a proposal titled "whois POC e-mail cleanup"
which was later combined with 4 other later proposals and retitled -
my initial proposal was sufficiently unworkable that it stimulated
a second proposal 3 days later titled "annual WHOIS POC Validation"
and that led to both to be combined with 2 other proposals to create the 
result that was eventually passed.

The policy is here:


> George
> _______________________________________________
> 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 info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list