Forcible reclamation?

[Jeff Williams]

Jon and all,

Jon Lewis wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Karl Auerbach wrote:
> 
> > If a block is not being advertised, then it is not filling router table
> > space.
> >
> > And since our underlying problem is router table space, not the number
> > prefixes available, revocation won't help fix the underlying problem.
> 
> If there were no shortage of address space, every multihomed ISP could be
> given a /19 :)

  Agreed.  That is why we should be looking at adding more address space
as a priority rather than imposing restrictions on allocations as a
priority.  I agree that if we can reclaim space that is not being used,
than this avenue should of course be exploited.  BUT FIRST and FORMOST
providing new and additional address space should be the #1 priority.
This however does not seem to be the case according to the tennor of
the discussion on this list, nor form statments made by Board members
of ARIN.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>  Jon Lewis <jlewis at fdt.net>  |  Unsolicited commercial e-mail will
>  Network Administrator       |  be proof-read for $199/message.
>  Florida Digital Turnpike    |
> ________Finger jlewis at inorganic5.fdt.net for PGP public key_______

Regards,
-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. IEG. INC. 
Phone :913-294-2375 (v-office)
E-Mail jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com