<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
On Jan 21, 2014, at 3:48 PM, Jimmy Hess <<a href="mailto:mysidia@gmail.com">mysidia@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 2:08 PM, ARIN <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank">info@arin.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Does anyone have the rationale for the sudden removal of 4.6 and 4.7?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There doesn't appear to have been any policy discussion surrounding them, so the action to suspend appears to be surprising, unwarranted, and contrary to the last known public consensus surrounding the addition of those policies. \\</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<div>Jimmy - </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Two relevant points - </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>1) These policies have been very sparingly used, and not at all used in recent years (we </div>
<div> haven't approved an amnesty request from 2004 on. We last approved an aggregation </div>
<div> request in 2008 - 4 aggregation requests in 2008, 2 in 2007, and one each in 2006 and </div>
<div> 2005.)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>2) The issue is that theoretically any organization with multiple blocks could come in and </div>
<div> ask for a single block as large as the sum of all the previously issue blocks. At this time,</div>
<div> given the space that has been issued to date, such a request could be larger than the </div>
<div> entire remaining IPv4 free pool in the worst case, and while we would theoretically get</div>
<div> back the existing blocks as they renumber out of them, that could be a lengthy process </div>
<div> (and would ikely still be significantly smaller than what we issued them)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Per ARIN's Policy Development Process, the ARIN Board of Trustees has the authority to</div>
<div>suspend policy and ask for an ARIN AC recommendation if it receives credible information</div>
<div>that a policy is flawed in such a way that it may cause significant problems if it continues to</div>
<div>be followed. I supplied the above information to the ARIN Board with full belief that the</div>
<div>policy poses the risk of significant problems (contrary to the community's intent and desire</div>
<div>for these policies) if it remained in force and was exercised at the present time by any of the </div>
<div>larger service providers in the region. If the folks feel that such use is appropriate (i.e. a large </div>
<div>provider requesting the remainder of the ARIN IPv4 free pool to renumber into and thus improve </div>
<div>routing aggregation by a handful of entries), then that should be discussed when the ARIN AC </div>
<div>sends its recommendation to the PPML mailing list.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks!</div>
<div>/John</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>John Curran</div>
<div>President and CEO</div>
<div>ARIN</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</body>
</html>