[arin-ppml] Policy discussion - Method of calculating utilization

[Jimmy Hess]

On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 1:04 PM, Leif Sawyer <lsawyer at gci.com> wrote:
> On behalf of myself, I support this proposal.
> On behalf of my company, which finds itself in the position
> of 8 large allocations above 93% and 1 small allocation below the 80% mark,
> I support this proposal.

I believe there should be both a  per-allocation utilization minimum
and an aggregate utilization criterion.

I also suggest a step-up in the utilization requirement:  the minimum
utilization criterion to say you are using the space efficiently
should be upped to 95% usage demonstrated, not 80%. It has been shown
that such efficient utilization is possible   and provides better
conservation of IP address space.

Conceivably the bar could be set at:  Minimum 50% utilization of each
previous allocation, and  95% utilization in the aggregate,  both
criteria to be met  for eligibility to receive additional address
space:   then the problem of "one small allocation"  inefficiently
used  is mitigated.

While just an aggregate utilization criterion interesting.   I don't
believe a /16 resource holder should be able to obtain more address
space, if they have a  separate /21 or  /20 allocation completely (or
mostly) unused;   it should either be used or returned, before another
request.

Justified needs means you efficiently utilize _all_  allocations,  not
just the last one you got,   not just the allocations you feel like
using efficiently.

--
-JH