[arin-ppml] Equality in address space assignment

[David Conrad]

Martin,

> On Apr 15, 2015, at 10:01 PM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com> wrote:
> This bar was intended to prevent anyone who wanted their own address space from getting it and routing it, and contributing to the global routing table.
> 
> Do we have pointers to the list archive to support that? I'd be interesting to see who proposed it, who supported it and the discussion. The AC has archives all the way back, IIRC.

IIUC, "this bar" pre-dated the AC (and ARIN).  I believe InterNIC had a policy that they would only allocate address space if you could demonstrate you had efficiently utilized the (/20?) address space that had been given to you by your upstream provider.  I remember discussions with Kim in which she was quite concerned (with reason) that if InterNIC were to allocate to all comers, the routers of the day (mid-90's) would fall over, resulting in prefix-length filters and other general unpleasantness (e.g., annoying Sean Doran).  RIPE-NCC and APNIC, having a relatively smaller customer base (the telcos believed OSI was the One True Future, so there were only those weird academic and entrepreneur types that were looking at this TCP/IP thing), didn't really worry about blowing up the routing tables, rather they were primarily interested in driving increased penetration of that TCP/IP thing.

This historic interlude brought to you by a very nice http://www.freemanwinery.com/wine/overview/2011-Russian-River-Valley-Pinot-Noir :)

Regards,
-drc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20150415/ad48bd36/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20150415/ad48bd36/attachment.sig>