[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2012-2: IPv6 Subsequent Allocations Utilization Requirement - revised

[Owen DeLong]

On Oct 1, 2012, at 09:46 , Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Sep 30, 2012, at 15:37 , Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Scott Leibrand
>>> <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sep 26, 2012, at 7:26 AM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> b.    An LIR qualifies for a subsequent allocation if they meet any of the following criteria:
>>>>> 
>>>>> * Shows utilization of 75% or more of their total address space
>>>>> 
>>>>> * Shows utilization of more than 90% of any serving site
>>>> 
>>>> I'm unclear on this one.  If I have one serving site full, and have unused blocks, why shouldn't I allocate an additional block to the full site? Why do I need more space from ARIN?
>>> 
>>> FYI: This one is existing policy. It's intention is to allow all
>>> serving sites (regions, etc.) to grow uniformly.
>>> 
>>>>> * Has allocated more than 90% of their serving site blocks to serving sites, and has sufficient actual utilization at their serving sites to continue to justify the block size being utilized for all serving sites as specified in section 6.5.2.
>>>> 
>>>> This one makes sense to me.  If the two above were both required, that would also make sense, but I don't get either/or.
>>> 
>>> This is the new criteria being added. I am unclear what "sufficient
>>> actual utilization" means in this context though.
>>> 
>> 
>> It means that at least one serving site has enough end-site assignments to justify the size of the serving site blocks.
> 
> Sure, but how many is that?

As specified in the original policy... enough such that the next lower nibble boundary would not leave a 25% minfree.

Owen