[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2012-6: Revising Section 4.4 C/I Reserved Pool Size
hannigan at gmail.com
Thu Oct 18 18:55:49 EDT 2012
I don't think it's big enough either since I initially proposed a /14.
Getting it on the docket was the goal and modifying it to a /15 to
silence the minority majority was the path of least resistance.
There were ~1900 applicants with an expected success rate of 70%
leaving ~1300 which most are primarily being applied for by currently
US companies. There are some foreign entities, but it's noise. If you
assign a /24 to each you're looking at a little more than a /14. The
noise should allow for the impact of IX's and other CI. I think a /14
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Christopher Morrow
<christopher.morrow at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Gary Buhrmaster
> <gary.buhrmaster at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Christopher Morrow
>> <christopher.morrow at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Given ICANN's discussions to significantly expand the number of gTLDs, I
>>>> think expanding the CI reservation from /16 to /15 is a reasonable
>>>> precaution. However, my prediction is that a /15 should be sufficient for
>>> I don't disagree that 'enlarging it..' seems good. I don't get a good
>>> feeling at all about how large is 'enough'.
>>>> several years of gTLD and other CI growth, I'm think 2 to 5 years. If that
>>>> turns out to be incorrect, then I would support expanding the reservation
>>>> with future returned space as necessary. But, I think we can take wait and
>>>> see approach in dealing with that contingency.
>>> I think the timeframe is not 2-5 yrs, but 'how long is it that v4 is
>>> still relevant/required at the TLD level?" and I'd expect that to last
>>> much further out than 2-5yrs... I was thinking at least 10 if not 20
>> Unfortunately, I am afraid that the only answer of how much
>> space is enough, or how long will IPv4 be relevant will be of
>> the form "We will know it when we experience it". Enlarging
>> the CI reserved space now seems to have little long term
>> downside (since we can always reduce it if not needed), with
>> the upside of having the space if we need it (for 10+ years).
>> I support the policy.
> I forgot to say that in general I support the policy, I just don't get
> a good feeling that /15 is large enough.
> I also (as said) don't know what would be 'large enough', so... sure, 15.
> 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.
More information about the ARIN-PPML