[arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML 2014-7

[Jimmy Hess]

On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 6:18 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
[snip]

Agreed.   Also agree that IXPs with only a handful of participants are a
very easy low-cost renumbering scenario.
Why should the bar be as low as two or 3 participants?

Why not make the required number  at least 9 or 10 participants minimum,
 with actual documentation for 4 or 5,  before a whole /24 is warranted?


It's not abuse I'm worried about. Abusers will coax the documentation
> to say what ARIN expects to hear. And if busted for fraud they'll get
> what's coming to them. My issue is with the unrecoverable addresses
> when the perfectly honest "IXP" fails to grow from two participants.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>

--
-JH
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140207/9468b4dd/attachment.htm>