[arin-ppml] Against 2013-4

[William Herrin]

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:57 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>   However, we know that DDN NIC (run by SRI) did require you to specify your
>   need for address space to determine which size allocation to issue you and
>   this meant your anticipated need initially, and at one, two, and five years
>   out.   This information was required to be submitted with the network
>   request template, and we have copies of those back as early as
>   1990 which make the requirement quite clear, and definitely in
>   keeping with the term needs-assessment as it is in use today.

Hi John,

Suggesting that the pre-1995 templates were "quite clear" in their
needs-basis stretches the truth. Prior to the 9/94 template, the
standard for larger-than-/24 assignments was "strong and convincing
reason" with no further guidance as to what sort of reason was
acceptable. No reason was expected for a /24 assignment.

The 8/95 template was the first one which called out the estimate of
hosts and subnets as providing the justification for a larger-than-/24
assignment. It wasn't until the RIRs took over in their respective
service areas (ARIN in '97) that there was any needs-basis for
refusing a request for a minimum size assignment.

You can safely say that ARIN has applied a needs assessment to all new
registrations since its inception. Before that, such claims become
dubious at best.

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