[arin-ppml] Requesting Feedback: Draft Policy ARIN-2014-22: Removal of Minimum in Section 4.10

William Herrin bill at herrin.us
Sat Jan 10 13:51:05 EST 2015

On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 3:15 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> BCP38 was out before RIRs started moving down to /24s. It didn’t take long
> for ISPs to adapt to /24s from /20s.

Hi Owen,

Most ISPs never adopted /20 in the first place. The were /24 before
and after. Those that adopted /20 were mostly aware of what goes on
here so had only the trouble they made for themselves.

/24 is different. Announcements smaller than /24 were interdicted
right at the start of CIDR by people who very nearly been burned by
too many announcements. The /24 filter is very widespread.

On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Heather Schiller
<heather.skanks at gmail.com> wrote:
>  As one of the shepherds of this policy, it would be very helpful to hear
> from the community on this proposal.  Comments for or against are welcome,
> as are any questions.
> "This block will be subject to a minimum size allocation of /28 and a
> maximum size allocation of /24. ARIN should use sparse allocation when
> possible within that /10 block."

Hi Heather,

I have no objection to changing the size to a flat /24. I do wonder
about the efficacy of the policy overall. For something this
transitory, is there a sound reason why addresses assigned from an
upstream ISP are not suitable?

What is ARIN's experience with allocations under this policy? Have
there been any? What were the justifications?

Bill Herrin

William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
May I solve your unusual networking challenges?

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list