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

Joe Maimon jmaimon at chl.com
Fri Jul 27 16:58:04 EDT 2012

Owen DeLong wrote:
> On Jul 27, 2012, at 7:08 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
> I don't know. I bet more people have affinities for numbers<65,536 than>65,536, however, so if that is your best argument for how this policy would encourage 32-bit adoption, I have to say I think it would have the opposite effect.

Since the number of 32bit ASN use in the ARIN region is statistical 
noise, there is only one direction to go.

> I (and I suspect ARIN staff) would interpret that to mean justifying 
> the ASN, not the reason one was seeking the specific ASN or specific 
> type of ASN. Further, since you're allowing, essentially, vanity ASNs, 
> I suspect a lot of the real-world reasons for wanting a particular ASN 
> would be "we like it and it's what we want" or something roughly 
> equivalent even if ARIN were to interpret the above language in that 
> context. 

That is most definitely not the intent of the words I wrote. And if ARIN 
wants further guidance on what is satisfactory, at least they will have 
something to talk to us about, instead of a bunch of blank guesses.

> As I stated above, I do not believe that it says or does what you 
> appear to think it will do. Owen 

Fair enough.

Short lived as this proposal was, I am optimistic that its contribution 
to our dialogue was positive and constructive.

Thank you to all who participated and donated of their cycles to this 



More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list