On Jun 5, 2013, at 16:44 , Steven Ryerse <srye...@eclipse-networks.com> wrote:
> The day is coming where IPv4 will become a whole lot more scarce as ARIN's > supply decreases. The needs based policies will need to be constantly > tightened "to keep from running out". It will be interesting to see if > everyone in this community who loves needs based policies today - will love > to have their allocation requests denied arbitrarily in the future. Of > course if you would like to tell me where else other than ARIN you would > recommend that I should go to obtain permanent IP resources for my BGP, I'd > gladly follow that up. And don't tell me to talk to my upstreams as I > already have and - surprise - they prefer me to go to ARIN for permanent IPv4 > resources - because of the impending IPv4 shortage. I fail to understand why you think that to "keep from running out" is a policy goal or anything that anyone is attempting to do. The simple reality is that we cannot keep from running out. We can shift how runout occurs for different subsets of the community, but we cannot prevent runout. Indeed, for all practical purposes, runout has already occurred for some segments of the community while it is still quite some time away for others. The smaller your particular need, the farther away runout currently is. However, from an overall perspective, frankly, the longer it takes to get to runout, the worse it is for the internet in general. What is, however, somewhat desirable is a semi-predictable and as fair as possible path to runout. > I would also point out that at least in the RIPE region folks seem to be > coming to their senses about the downsides of needs based allocations. Maybe > that is because they have less IPv4 than ARIN now has - and are starting to > see the forest thru the trees. I'm seeing some comments in this community > that maybe that is the wrong way to go here too - so hopefully sanity will > prevail here too! Describing your opposition as insane is almost certainly not the best way to bring them over to your side of the debate. Owen > > -----Original Message----- > From: arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On > Behalf Of Seth Mattinen > Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 6:39 PM > To: arin-ppml@arin.net > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Against 2013-4 > > On 6/5/13 10:25 AM, Steven Ryerse wrote: >> Well Jason, you have just proved the point. I in fact did formally >> request a smallest block of IPv4 that ARIN and I was turned down and >> the reason they gave is that we did NOT qualify under current policy. >> In my opinion this is the fear of IPv4 exhaustion run amok. >> >> Since ARIN is essentially the monopoly for the US area > > > For goodness sake stop parroting the monopoly drivel. Every freaking region > has an RIR. > > ~Seth > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public > Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
