[arin-ppml] Utilization policy is not aggregate

[Jimmy Hess]

On 11/15/12, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
> Not necessarily opposed, but one reason for the existing language is: if you
> are at 90% of a /16, and your 3 month need is only for a /20, then you would
> still be at >80% immediately after getting your /20, without using a bit of

exactly....  and It would not be favorable to have a measure of
utilization that allowed an organization to fail to efficiently
utilize  each of the allocations they obtain, before requesting
another.

It's essentially like saying  "You used your previous allocation _SO_
efficiently, that we will give you a bonus,  and  let you not use the
next allocation so efficiently, and still obtain more resources."

Instead it should just be  "lesson learned"  for the applicant;  if
you ever actually exceed 80% utilization, stop allocating from that
block, start allocating from the new one, and there is no need to
change policy.

(Except to increase the utilization requirement to a higher value);
E.g.  80%  utilization on the preceding allocation,  and 99%
utilization on  allocations that preceded it..


The applicant who got the larger allocation and achieved the same
overall percentage of utilization,  had to meet a larger need
requirement to obtain that allocation.    And they also had to
allocate more number resources after actually obtaining the
allocation, to be allocated the next one.

> Scott
--
-JH