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

[Fernando Frediani]

I remain opposed to this proposal for different reasons. Reducing the 
allocation from /22 to /24 will not solve any tangible problem. Instead 
will create a new one as /24 is so small even for the smaller 
organizations that are waiting in order to use it properly to connect 
people and businesses. It is necessary to guarantee that whoever 
receives in such scenario has a bare minimal to do things and /22 is 
already something very small.
This allows organizations to exist, innovate and then at some point in 
time be able to transfer further blocks in order to keep doing business.

It may sound the proposal be aiming to reduce anxiety from having to 
wait too long in the waiting list, but the reality is that there aren't 
IP addresses left to to replenish the pool and there is no much that can 
be done about that. That is a fact for quiet a while.

What I would support in another proposal is to reduce the eligibility 
criteria to stand in the waiting list to simply have already any IPv4 
allocation regardless the size. There is a big significant difference 
between one who has addresses already and newer one who have nothing. 
Whatever left can go to them and will benefit the Internet in the region 
by having more and different actors and business happening. Those who 
have something have options to continue and grow their existing business.

Fernando

On 01/10/2024 02:41, William Herrin wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 10:29 AM ARIN<info at arin.net> wrote:
>> Policy Statement:
>>
>> 4.1.8. ARIN Waitlist
>>
>> ARIN will only issue future IPv4 assignments/allocations (excluding 4.4 and 4.10 space) from the ARIN Waitlist.
> Strange formulation since ARIN issues transferred IP addresses to the recipient.
>
>
>> Organizations which ever held any IPv4 space other than special use space received under section 4.4 or 4.10 are not eligible to apply.
> Bad grammar. Which ever held? Even if you fix it to "which have ever
> held," it's still a clumsy sentence.
>
> And why exclude 4.4 and 4.10? Are there an abundance of critical
> infrastructure providers who don't have other IPv4 space, can't afford
> to get it on the market, yet have the time to dilly dally on the
> waitlist? Doesn't seem like such infrastructure is particularly
> critical.
>
>
>> Address space distributed from the waitlist will not be eligible for transfer, with the exception of Section 8.2 transfers, for a period of 60 months.
> So if I create an LLC to hold the addresses I can sell the LLC to get
> around the transfer restriction? I mean, I could do that anyway but
> with this exception the recipient wouldn't even have to maintain the
> LLC.
>
>
>> This policy will be applied to all future distributions from the waitlist to include those currently listed.
> Bad grammar. What does "to include" mean here?
>
>
>> This policy will apply to waitlist requests received following the
>> implementation of this policy. Waitlist requests received prior to
>> the implementation of this policy will not be affected.
> This seems to conflict with the preceding text about it being applied
> to all future distributions?
>
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20241002/0662b95b/attachment.htm>