[arin-ppml] ARIN-2023-8 - Reduce 4.1.8 Maximum Allocation

[Mike Burns]

Hi John,

Hi John,

I can see the validity of that case, although it begs the question why an entity that can limp along with a single address needs a /22.
I concede the waitlist has worked for a long time and it was the best solution for distributing free pool addresses when they existed in reasonable quantities.
Now, with the waitlist times eclipsing justification times, a change is needed.

Regards,
Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of John Santos
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 4:32 PM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-2023-8 - Reduce 4.1.8 Maximum Allocation



On 8/14/2024 3:58 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 12:46 AM Gerry E.. George <ggeorge at digisolv.com> wrote:
>> As  a co-shepherd on policy 2023-8 (Gerry George & Brian Jones) on 
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2023-8: Reduce 4.1.8 Maximum Allocation, I'm 
>> reaching out for additional feedback from the community on this 
>> policy following the robust discussions at and since ARIN-53.
> 
> Hi Gerry,
> 
> The wait list system is not really sane. If your need can afford to 
> wait three years to fulfill it with addresses, how does that not say 
> everything that needs to be said about its legitimacy?
> 
> I'd like to see a concrete proposal along the lines of releasing 
> waitlist addresses to the brokers for sale or directly auctioning them 
> off as they become available. Maybe the mechanics won't work out, but 
> I'd like to see it and consider whether it's a reasonable idea after 
> the details are ironed out. Since these are returned blocks, 
> auctioning them explicitly would also allow bidders to evaluate their 
> reputation history when making an offer rather than getting stuck with 
> whatever random block comes up.
> 
> In the interests of fairness to the folks who joined the wait list in 
> good faith, perhaps limit the first few auctions to folks already on 
> the waitlist before opening it up to the public at large.
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin

Perhaps the waiter has a use case that can limp along indefinitely using an ISP-provided static address (with no real protection against it ever changing) and a massive amount of NAT and RFC 1918 addresses, but it would be far more effect if they had a real /24 of routable address space no subject to the whims of their provider.  It is working, but far from optimal, and they are willing to wait a few years on the wait list.  On the other hand, they are a small business or a non-profit or an EDU or otherwise lack deep pockets so they have to watch their budget.  The wait list might not be perfect, but it is the best solution to their needs.



--
John Santos
Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
781-861-0670 ext 539

_______________________________________________
ARIN-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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.