[arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - February 2012

[Owen DeLong]

> Not. I agree, the /10 for cable operators should have never been set
> aside so you can't really lump everyone into that fur ball. I wrote

I presume by "the /10 for cable operators" you refer to the /10 for
transitional technologies. I will note that while this effort was spearheaded
by folks from Cable Labs, the Broadband forum is also behind it and
so are many DSL and PON-based ISPs.

I would say it is more of a carve-out for residential ISPs than a carve out
for cable operators, but, even beyond residential ISPs there may well
be application(s) for that space. Primarily it is a carve out of private
address space to support an intermediate layer of NAT in a NAT444
environment, but, it can also be used for several other transition-related
purposes.

Owen