[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-167 Removal of Renumbering Requirement for Small Multihomers

[Chris Grundemann]

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 9:57 AM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> On 5/2/12, Alexander, Daniel <Daniel_Alexander at cable.comcast.com> wrote:
>> If aggregation is so important to require renumbering in section 4.3.6.2,
>> why is it not a big deal in section 8.3 which will shortly become the more
>> frequently used option?
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> It is a big deal in 8.3 and at least some of us are still ticked at
> the AC for stripping it out the basic protections that were in the
> various discussions and proposals.

While I disagree with the blame being laid solely on the AC (we
generally do what the majority of the community asks us to), I do
agree that this is an equal issue in 8.3 and point out (again) that
this is one of the unintended (or at least unannounced) effects of
2011-11. Before 2011-11, all of the new member (slow-start) policies
applied equally to allocations and specified transfers. Only with the
adoption of 2011-11 were those protections removed for 8.3 transfers.
I certainly do not remember anyone lobbying for de-aggregation in
transfers, that is simply the way things have turned out.

$.02
~Chris

>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
>
> --
> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.



-- 
@ChrisGrundemann
http://chrisgrundemann.com