[arin-ppml] Internet Fairness

Owen DeLong owen at delong.com
Fri Dec 19 16:53:40 EST 2014

> On Dec 19, 2014, at 13:13 , Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com> wrote:
> Owen wrote: However, IMHO, we are at a point with IPv4 where every address allocated or assigned is an address effectively taken away from someone else. Therefore, it is only prudent to make sure that each address allocated or assigned goes to an organization with a genuine need for those addresses.
> Steven wrote:  Another way of saying what you stated above is that it is OK to deny allocations to a small Org with limited resources so that larger ones with deeper pockets can get them.  I don’t know if you prefer it to be that way, but that is the way it is in real life for a small Org.  That is what I am fighting to change. 

No, that is not what I said at all.

A small organization which genuinely needs addresses is equally entitled to them as a large one.

The policy requirements are not about preventing one class of organization from getting addresses so that another class may have them. They are about making sure that the resources are allocated fairly according to need. The transfer policy (which, if you will recall, I generally opposed) could be said to be about moving resources to the organizations with the deepest pockets, but the free pool allocation and assignment policies most definitely are not.

In fact, one could make the argument that since most larger organizations tend to fall into the ISP category and assignment policy is now more liberal than allocation policy (12 months instead of 3 months, for example), that current policy actually slightly favors smaller organizations over larger ones with deeper pockets.

I know that we strive to make policy as fair as possible for every size organization.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20141219/7f9289a1/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list