[arin-ppml] About needs basis in 8.3 transfers
SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com
Fri Jun 6 01:16:14 EDT 2014
Yes of course there is some right-sizing intertwined with needs testing in existing policies which blurs the actual real-life effect. You make my point in your description of what happens with allocation requests. When a larger organization requests a larger block they probably will come away from it with an allocation, possibly smaller than requested (and prefer) but they are likely to receive an allocation none the less. When a small organization requests the minimum block size and that request is refused because of policy, they get nothing at all. No matter how you slice it that is an un-even playing field and is arbitrary, unfair, and discriminatory against small organizations in favor of larger ones. I have been pointing this out for years and I've said it just about every way I know how. It is time this gets corrected to level the playing field for all. The needs tests need to go!
Steven L Ryerse
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338
770.656.1460 - Cell
770.399.9099 - Office
770.392-0076 - Fax
℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
Conquering Complex Networks℠
From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com]
Sent: Friday, June 6, 2014 12:25 AM
To: Steven Ryerse
Cc: John Santos; arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] About needs basis in 8.3 transfers
On Jun 5, 2014, at 7:10 PM, Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com> wrote:
> My post was in fact the lines below with the single > in front of them.
> Yes I have advocated right-sizing instead of needs testing several times. Right sizing and needs testing have some similarities and in my opinion are easily confused. A needs test ends up in a pass fail or yes no outcome and you either get the requested resources or you don’t. I would add this needs testing can easily be used by the haves to keep the have nots from receiving any resources at all, and in my opinion that is happening. However with a right-sizing test, the outcome always ends up with an allocation being made (or offered) even if it turns out to only be the size of the current policy Minimum. This is a huge difference for a small organization and it levels the playing field for smaller organizations!
If that is your definition of needs testing, then in my experience ARIN already engages in “right-sizing” because many times when I was unable to convince them that my client qualified for what we asked for, they suggested a longer prefix (smaller amount of addresses) that they would approve immediately. We would usually accept their offer with a request that they reserve the original request amount if possible. Then we would implement and fully utilize the original approval and go back for the rest. This usually worked quite well.
> I realize that an organization might be allocated (or offered) a smaller allocation than requested, but all organizations can at least get the smallest allocation per the current policy minimum - not always the perfect situation but a lot better than zero resources. Further I don't think this hurts the haves at all (except maybe more competition), and I do not agree that "without needs testing the "haves" would have had it all a long time ago" - as long as right-sizing tests are applied to all.
I think that recent policy changes have improved this. I would welcome policy proposals that further improved the situation.
Removing needs basis from 8.3 transfers doesn’t do that and it has a number of other harmful outcomes as previously discussed.
More information about the ARIN-PPML