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

[Fernando Frediani]

I keep looking at these discussions and thinking how some as 
nonconformist even about stuff there is no much what to do. There is 
simply no IP address left and it is not possible to make up IP address 
out of thin air.
Waiting list takes long because, guess what ... there is no IP space to 
supply all justified needs.

And I wonder what is the logic of proposing finish with the waiting 
list. Perhaps with this not existing anymore there would be less 
nonconformity, although would do nothing for addresses that keep being 
recovered and need to keep being distributed in the most fair way.
Guess what is the most fair way to do that ? The waiting list !

/22 is already nothing for a new comers to do something in their 
beginning, so they need to have a chance to do something minimal and 
wheever they grow they can go to market and keep going, but reducing the 
maximum allocation to a /23 would not help in any way to make the 
waiting list fairer and will make the life of newcomers who a able to 
get some tiny space from it more difficult.

Therefore abandon this proposal.

Fernando

On 22/12/2024 17:26, Denis Motova wrote:
> Good Evening Everyone!
>
> Amazing how much back and forth we’re having on this policy, 
> absolutely brilliant! Let’s keep it up. My two cents on the matter is 
> as follows:
>
> 1. There is a waiting list and any changes should include a provision 
> that protects existing waiting list members.
> 2. I believe that only a /23 minimum would be acceptable, as a /24 is 
> simply too small for any meaningful networks.
>
> However, my actual thought process is on this, why change something 
> that works already? Yes, we have a wait time that is slightly large, 
> but ok…
> Why should everything be instant? I believe that we should be looking 
> for meaningful changes not changes to address speed, and instant 
> gratification.
>
> Just my two cents on the matter.
>
> Denis
>
>> On 21 Dec 2024, at 1:06 AM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 12:10 PM Gerry E.. George 
>> <ggeorge at digisolv.com> wrote:
>>> We are now seeing 4 feasible options for this Draft Policy:
>>> 1. Consider revised policy as written (with proposed retroactive 
>>> protections - still 3+-year lag and wait times);
>>> 2. Consider policy without any retroactive protections (reduction in 
>>> wait times by ⅔s);
>>> 3. Do away with the Waitlist completely (new policy would be required);
>>> 4. Abandon the policy (essentially, do nothing, no changes to 
>>> current operations)
>>
>> One thing I'd like to point out:
>>
>> Options 2 and 3 are not mutually exclusive with option 1.
>>
>> We can adopt option 1 and continue discussing modification to requests
>> currently in the queue. If those discussions prove fruitless, adopting
>> option 1 will still leave us with a solution 3 years out.
>>
>> We can adopt option 1 and continue discussing elimination of the
>> waitlist. Even if we do not find a better alternative to the waitlist,
>> it will at least become more functional in 3 years time.
>>
>> Only option 4 conflicts with option 1, leaving us with zero progress
>> on the problem that the waitlist is just too darn long.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bill Herrin
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> William Herrin
>> bill at herrin.us
>> https://bill.herrin.us/
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <http://www.brcrude.com>
>
> 	
> 	
>
> Denis Motova
>
> B-Rock Crude Partners LLC
>
> 	
>
> dmotova at brcrude.com
>
>
> 	
>
> 	
>
> 1684 Medina Road #118
> Medina, OH 44256
>
> 	
>
> brcrude.com <http://www.brcrude.com>
>
> DISCLAIMER: This electronic transmission and/or attached document(s) 
> have not been verified or authenticated and are not to be considered a 
> solicitation for any purpose in any form or content, nor an offer to 
> sell and/or buy securities and or properties. Merely describing the 
> details of an existing private transaction does not constitute an 
> offer or solicitation of any kind and, if presented, is done so as a 
> request for information. Upon receipt of these documents you, as the 
> recipient(s), hereby acknowledge this warning and disclaimer. It is 
> important that you do your due diligence on any and all commodity 
> offers as we do not warrant any offers that we forward from any other 
> source. We make all attempts to verify information and documents as 
> much as possible but we can't guarantee authenticity.
>
> This email and its attachments may contain information that is 
> privileged or confidential or legally exempt from disclosure, 
> dissemination, distribution or reproduction by anyone other than the 
> intended recipients. If you are not the intended recipient, please 
> immediately notify us and permanently delete the original and any 
> copies thereof.
>
> This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 
> 1986, Codified at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1367, 2510-2521, 2701-2710, 3121-3126. 
> See http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/glbact/glbsub1.htm Gramm-Leach-Bliley 
> Act 15 USC, Subchapter I, Sec. 6801-6809. This email and the attached 
> related documents are never to be considered a solicitation for any 
> purpose in any form or content.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.