[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-129: IPv4 Addresses for Process Participants

[Matthew Kaufman]

On 1/21/2011 1:20 PM, Kevin Stange wrote:
>
> That wasn't the point.  We as participants don't have any greater need
> than those that do not.  You're suggesting that my organization gets to
> greedily take space ahead of some other organization that may need it
> first, more urgently, when I still have a free pool left I'm allocating
> from and that organization may not.

Yes. Just a few days before...

> While I would love to hoard some IPv4 to stave off my local runout, this
> is completely against the spirit of the existing allocation process.

The behavior of ARIN post-runout with regard to IPv4 space will *also* 
be completely against the spirit of the existing allocation process.

The other organization will come with a perfectly valid justification, 
and ARIN won't fill it. How is *that* fair? (It is unavoidable, but that 
doesn't mean it is fair or nice)

Matthew Kaufman