[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-6: Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors - Revised Problem Statement and Policy Text
gary.buhrmaster at gmail.com
Fri Sep 13 13:06:02 EDT 2013
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 3:53 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> More, "plurality" makes the 20% rule needlessly complicated. I have to
> keep 20% in the ARIN region... unless I have 23% in the RIPE region
> and then I need to keep 24% in the ARIN region unless I have 30% in
> the APNIC region in which case I need 31% in the ARIN region, but if
> that drops the RIPE region down to 27% I can reduce the ARIN region
> holdings to 28%.
Unless I am misreading this, this proposal deals with the initial
(or additional) allocation/assignments, and not on-going activities.
Once you get the numbers, you could then move the numbers
to other regions. Yes, that opens up some ways to "game" the
intent. That has been true for, well, forever. However, unless
the community requests that ARIN start to do reviews of existing
allocation/assignments and requires that they meet current
policies (which, AFAIK, no one is suggesting), the "plurality"
requirement does not seem too onerous given that one already
has to provide quite a bit of documentation to ARIN for numbers.
Where do you have the plurality of the resources? Apply to that
More information about the ARIN-PPML