[arin-ppml] Petition for advancement of Policy Proposal #168

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Thu Jul 26 01:56:32 EDT 2012

On Jul 25, 2012, at 10:34 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:

> Chris Grundemann wrote:
>> Hi Joe,
>> Perhaps if you more fully explain how this policy change would deal
>> with the lack of uptale of 4byte ASN (how specifically it differs from
>> current ARIN practice and how those changes "Promote 4byte ASN Usage")
>> more folks would be more in favor of it (and of your petition). I
>> personally have not been able to parse that myself and so it may be
>> possible that others are in the same boat. Just a thought.
>> Cheers,
>> ~Chris
>> mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> Hey Chris,
> The proposal gives requesters flexibility in obtaining as numbers.
> This translates into preserving 16bit access for those who need or want it.

Current policy provides for requestors to get a 16 bit AS number until we run out of them.

At that point, no amount of policy will change the fact that we are out of 16 bit AS numbers.

> It also translates into increasing attractiveness for 32bit for those who may have an affinity or preference for a specific one and under this proposal, can get it.

You'll need to explain how it does that. As near as I could tell, if you had a affinity for any number, 16 or 32 bit, you could request it if it was available and there was nothing specific about 32-bit ASNs in the proposal to justify the above claim.

> Further, the proposal gives ARIN eyes, ears and a voice into the inner workings of why people want the numbers they do and dont want the numbers they dont.

How do you figure that? It doesn't require anyone to provide that information to ARIN in the process of justifying their request.

> This is something ARIN does not have now.

Nor is it actually part of the proposed policy from what I read.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list