[arin-ppml] Transition /10

[Spears, Christopher M.]

NRPM 4.10 [1] dedicated /10 for IPv6 "transition”..

I tossed a similar idea around with some folks at ARIN36.   Use this /10 to allocate a /24 per **new** Org, and steer subsequent transactions to transfers.   That would ensure IPv4 for ~16K **new** entrants in the coming years..   

[1] https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four10

On Oct 20, 2015, at 11:05 AM, Hadenfeldt, Andrew C <Andrew.C.Hadenfeldt at windstream.com> wrote:

> I’m missing some context… RFC6598 (100.64.0.0/10)?
>  
> -Andy 
>  
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Martin Hannigan
> Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2015 9:57 AM
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: [arin-ppml] Transition /10
>  
>  
> Any reason why at this point we shouldn't transition the transition /10 to a last /N like policy to more align with others? It does seem to be reasonable and fair. It seems like it was a mistake to not set aside the /8.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Best,
> 
> -M<
> This email message and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.