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