[arin-ppml] Utilization policy is not aggregate
jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net
Fri Nov 16 20:40:08 EST 2012
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Larry Ash <lar at mwtcorp.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:22:53 -0600
> Jimmy Hess <mysidia at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/15/12, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Not necessarily opposed, but one reason for the existing language is: if
>>> are at 90% of a /16, and your 3 month need is only for a /20, then you
>>> still be at >80% immediately after getting your /20, without using a bit
>> 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
>> 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.
> Reaching 80% on a smaller allocation is a lot
> harder than a /18. Over time holes develop in the utilization.
> You will reuse them but at any given time it's difficult if not
> How about 80% overall with no single allocation under 70% (whatever).
> The 80% policy has always greatly favored the big guys. It's much
> easier to reach 80% on a /18 than a /20. Natural holes that occur
> always seem to amount to almost 10-25% in a /20 unless much of it
> has been delegated as /23's or /24's.
> I have turned away customers on a number of occasions over the years
> because they needed /24's or larger and I didn't have any open and no
> hope of getting more. For several years my utilization was only in the
> lower 70's but the largest contiguous blocks were frequently /26's.
> We constantly worked at closing the gaps but you can only ask customers
> to do so much.
>> (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.
>> 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:
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> Larry Ash
Ditto. My largest contiguous is probably a /28 right now, but I still
did not (until yesterday) qualify for more space with ARIN.
Jeffrey A. Lyon, CISSP
President, Black Lotus Communications
mobile: (757) 304-0668 | gtalk: jeffrey.lyon at gmail.com | skype: blacklotus.net
More information about the ARIN-PPML