[arin-ppml] Policy discussion - Method of calculating utilization
jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net
Wed Apr 30 12:11:47 EDT 2014
How do we define free pool exhaustion? We're already at < 1 x /8 and
RIPE has already stopped issuing new IPv4 space (not sure what APNIC
et al are up to) but the situation is dire enough that I feel we
should consider ourselves at the exhaustion point.
On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:08 AM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
> No, but I think it will be before any new policy proposal moving at "normal" speed takes effect. (The /24 minimum allocation size might take effect before then. If so, that will probably accelerate runout further.)
> If you think (as I do) that this policy change would still be useful after runout when most requests result in a transfer, you could probably sidestep a lot of potential opposition by specifying that it would only go into effect after free pool runout, or would only affect transfers.
>> On Apr 30, 2014, at 8:51 AM, Jeffrey Lyon <jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net> wrote:
>> Also, we're already in Phase 4, so isn't it fair to say that the free
>> pool is essentially exhausted?
>> Thanks, Jeff
>>> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> This seems to me like a reasonable operational practice for ARIN to use to
>>> help prevent a run on the remaining free pool from organizations with large
>>> quantities of existing space.
>>> Are you trying to change this before free pool runout, or are you concerned
>>> with making needs justification a bit easier for transfers once the free
>>> pool is exhausted? I would support the latter, but not the former.
>>> On Wednesday, April 30, 2014, Jeffrey Lyon <jeffrey.lyon at blacklotus.net>
>>>> Friends, Colleagues,
>>>> A couple of years ago I brought up an issue I had run into where the
>>>> utilization requirement for new requests is being calculated on a per
>>>> allocation basis rather than in aggregate. For example, if an
>>>> organization has 4 x /22 and 3 of them are utilized 100% and the
>>>> fourth utilized at 75%, that request would be denied. This is a bit
>>>> out of balance as an organization with a single /20 utilized at 80%
>>>> would have less efficient utilization but would be eligible to request
>>>> additional space.
>>>> The last time this was discussed it sounded as if the community would
>>>> support a policy proposal to change this calculation to be considered
>>>> in aggregate vs. per assignment. Does this remain the case?
>>>> Jeffrey A. Lyon, CISSP-ISSMP
>>>> Fellow, Black Lotus Communications
>>>> mobile: (757) 304-0668 | gtalk: jeffrey.lyon at gmail.com | skype:
>>>> 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.
>> Jeffrey A. Lyon, CISSP-ISSMP
>> Fellow, Black Lotus Communications
>> mobile: (757) 304-0668 | gtalk: jeffrey.lyon at gmail.com | skype: blacklotus.net
Jeffrey A. Lyon, CISSP-ISSMP
Fellow, Black Lotus Communications
mobile: (757) 304-0668 | gtalk: jeffrey.lyon at gmail.com | skype: blacklotus.net
More information about the ARIN-PPML