[arin-ppml] A Redefinition of IPv4 Need post ARIN run-out(was:Re:Against 2013-4)
bross at pobox.com
Wed Jun 12 14:57:30 EDT 2013
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Steven Ryerse wrote:
> No I just meant companies their size could possibly justify a full /8 so
> applying a /12 max on everyone might not work if somebody big applied
> for something bigger than a /12.
I'm still not following you.
What I believe has been proposed is that if the total amount of address
space under an entity's control is less than an aggregate /12 then no
needs assessment is performed to transfer address space.
If the org has a /12 or more of aggregate space, or they are requesting
space from the free pool, they have to go through a needs assessment.
There is no hard cap on the amount of address space an entity may have,
only what they have to do in order to get more.
Am I missing something?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brandon Ross [mailto:bross at pobox.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:11 PM
> To: Steven Ryerse
> Cc: Mike Burns; William Herrin; ARIN PPML
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] A Redefinition of IPv4 Need post ARIN run-out(was:Re:Against 2013-4)
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Steven Ryerse wrote:
>> Don't know if a /12 cap would work if a big guy like tmobile or
>> Microsoft applied for a larger allocation. It is fine for most
>> organizations though.
> Huh? Are you suggesting that Tmobile and Microsoft are incapable of completing the needs justification process??
Brandon Ross Yahoo & AIM: BrandonNRoss
+1-404-635-6667 ICQ: 2269442
Schedule a meeting: https://doodle.com/bross Skype: brandonross
More information about the ARIN-PPML