[arin-ppml] Revised - Draft Policy ARIN-2017-9: Clarification of Initial Block Size for IPv4 ISP Transfers
David R Huberman
daveid at panix.com
Mon Feb 12 13:48:53 EST 2018
David and PPML,
David Farmer asked:
> Do you support or oppose the policy as written?
I oppose the policy as written.
David Farmer also asked:
> Do you think the inconsistency described in the Problem Statement
> should be corrected?
> If yes, should it be corrected by revising by section 8.5.4 to be
> consistent with section 4.2.2, as proposed by the current text?
> Or, as an alternative by revising section 4.2.2 to be consistent with
> section 8.5.4?
I think 8.5 adequately sets forth criteria for block size. 8.5.5 is
especially "generous" (at least, compared to similar needs tests of the
last 20 years of ARIN's existence), and is good "one size fits all" policy
I also think staff are properly applying policy with their current
procedures for dealing with any requests justified under 4.2.2 but
fulfilled under section 8.
I would be in favor of the AC abandoning 2017-9.
More information about the ARIN-PPML