[arin-ppml] Ip allocation

[David Conrad]

Derek,

On Apr 28, 2014, at 8:58 PM, Derek Calanchini <derekc at cnets.net> wrote:
> Here are some answers you may have missed:
> 1.
> Arin said the smallest I could request was a /20, I was requesting a /22.  My current /22 is currently owned by Integra...I procured them from Electric Lightwave before they got eaten by Integra.
> 
> So what does legacy mean? 

It means it was allocated prior to the requirement of entering into a Registration Services Agreement.

> Arin told me that Integra owned the IP's I am using.  Would it be possible to strong arm them into letting me reassign them to ATT?

Unlikely, but large amounts of money might help convince them. I suspect this approach isn't of interest however.

> 2.
> I did put in the request that I was going to surrender my current /22 after migration to the newly requested /22.

Not relevant. The applicable policy is quite clear: you need to "demonstrate need" for a /20, something that will be a bit challenging for you at this point.

> 3.
> This seems to cover it:
> 
> https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_33/PDF/monday/nobile_policy.pdf
> (is this the draft to prop 207??)

No, that's a presentation that is providing information to the community regarding ARIN staff's experiences in implementing the policies the community has developed. One of the things Leslie (the head of registration services) was pointing out was that there were ... issues with existing policy.

I believe "prop 207" being referenced is https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/ARIN_prop_207_orig.html.  I'm guessing Martin's concerns is that policy proposal is way more complicated than what you need.  What you appear to need is revising 4.3.2.1 of the NRPM to say /22 instead of /20.

> Is there anything I can do to speed this along?  Seriously, I will do authoring, leg work, make calls...whatever it takes!

To be honest, so far, you are seeing something approaching light speed in the RIR policy world.  IIUC, what some folks are suggesting is that the ARIN Board step in and modify policy to address this particular issue before the next ARIN meeting (in Bellevue, WA in early June).  This would be somewhat similar to tunneling through a wormhole...

Regards,
-drc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140428/01e8f1b4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140428/01e8f1b4/attachment.sig>