[arin-ppml] ARIN-2011-5: Shared Transition Space for IPv4 Address Extension - Last Call
jmaimon at chl.com
Sun Apr 24 10:04:39 EDT 2011
Owen DeLong wrote:
>>> I'm really not seeing a point to your financial statement here.
>> If there is real need and this proposal does not end up being
>> implemented, you'll see this group pool their money and acquire
>> address space. They would likely opt to cost share the transaction and
>> the divisors would work in their favor.
> Uh, perhaps, but, more likely they will get it from ARIN and not
> from the market. Further, more likely, rather than pool their money,
> they'll just get individual assignments/allocations.
Are you telling me that all these operators are not and will not be
requesting justifiable resources from ARIN because they plan on using
this shared /10 from that?
As I and many others have repeatedly pointed out, the notion is naive
Can we put this to rest one way or the other?
Do you or anyone else have credible information regarding any operators
who have decided not to continue processing and generating additional IP
requests because they plan on making do with this /10?
The /10 this proposal aims to remove from the community forever will
only come to play when comparable resources are unavailable to anyone
from anywhere else. And then it will serve only these large orgs
interests and none other.
I suppose I would horse trade support for a proposal like this for a
proposal that would take a /10 out for those who will truly get shafted
after ARIN exhaustion.
It wont be those orgs who collectively received 80% of ARIN resources.
Let us all sit by while the new G8 emerges to control address
availability in the North America region.
That will make the v6 root canal without novocain people happy.
More information about the ARIN-PPML