[arin-ppml] ARIN 2014-13
SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com
Sat Jul 19 14:04:02 EDT 2014
I've said this before, but this proposal might help an Org that only needs a /24 but I think it will hurt an Org that needs a /20 or a /22 as the needs test that are applied will force them into qualifying for the /24 but not the /20 or /22 they legitimately need. Orgs that legitimately need a slightly larger allocation because of the gyrations they must go thru to try and justify a larger allocation, will end up not qualifying even though they have a legitimate need. The solution here is to completely remove the needs tests at the low end and not just on a /24. Proposal like 2014-13 are just dancing around the problem instead of trying to legitimately fix it.
Small Organizations are very much under-represented in this Community and therefore their reasonable interests go under-represented. I do appreciate you asking Gary but I don't see the needs of small Organizations truly represented in this Community.
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338
770.656.1460 - Cell
℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
Conquering Complex Networks℠
From: Gary Buhrmaster [mailto:gary.buhrmaster at gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 9:41 PM
To: Steven Ryerse
Cc: Owen DeLong; arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN 2014-13
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com> wrote:
> You are entitled to your opinion and I’m entitled to mine.
Absolutely, but you have been unable to articulate a compelling scenario as to how this will negatively impact the region and the members who request numbers. If you would share the specific example of how being able to get a /24 (whereas before they would qualify for nothing having too small of a justified need) will end up hurting the community, you need to share. We are not mind readers (well, at least I am not, I can not speak to any psychic abilities that others that participate on this list may claim to have). Thanks.
More information about the ARIN-PPML