[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-7: Section 4.4 Micro Allocation Conservation Update - Revised

Scott Leibrand scottleibrand at gmail.com
Tue Mar 11 19:29:12 EDT 2014


On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Scott Leibrand
> > <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Any reason two small rural players shouldn't start with
> >> a PA /30 and renumber into a larger block if/when they get a third
> participant?
> >>
> >> Unless someone has a good argument for why that's an excessive burden,
> support changing 2 to 3.
>
> Howdy,
>
> I agree with Scott. I can still get a /28 on a consumer DSL line for
> $25/mo and routers renumber easily. There is no burden here.
>
>
> > Would you entertain more than 3?
>
> I would entertain up to 5, allowing a comfortable fit in a /29 before
> requesting ARIN space. Beyond that the logistical problems become
> noticeable enough to merit a direct assignment. Not so severe as to
> require it, but noticeable.
>

If provider A is connecting to a small IXP in order to connect to provider
B, but the /29 is controlled by a third party (provider C) that provider A
may not even choose to peer with, then provider A may be reluctant to
connect.  If the IXP can get ARIN space based on 3 participants, that seems
like the logical cutoff point to me.

I still (weakly) support the change from 2 to 3, but would not support a
larger number.

-Scott
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140311/2a3d0330/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list