[arin-ppml] FW: Proposal: Clarification of draft policy 2009-3 (ARIN-prop-135)

Martin Hannigan hannigan at gmail.com
Tue Feb 22 18:21:53 EST 2011

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:00 AM, Matthew Petach <mpetach at netflight.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Matthew Petach <mpetach at netflight.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 6:02 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>>> Correct.  Make the intent of the policy clear and unambiguous.  I believe the AC is working on that presently.
>>> /John
>> I'd like to raise my voice in SUPPORT of the policy proposal to render explicit
>> the set of IPv4 addresses being returned to IANA as "{}".
>> Matt
> To clarify, as I've gotten some questions about my stance;
> those addresses which were allocated by IANA to ARIN for
> the region, I believe should stay within the region.
> Address blocks *not* allocated by IANA to ARIN, namely
> address blocks assigned to "legacy" holders should be returned
> whence they came, if they are freed up, namely to IANA, as those
> never passed through ARIN's hands in the first place.

But if the IANA has no procedure for openly and transparently
delivering the addresses back to the community, what should happen?
Part of what 131 is about is insuring that if this is the case as it
is now, that those addresses are not going to sit idle if there is



More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list