On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Steven Ryerse wrote:
No I just meant companies their size could possibly justify a full /8 so
applying a /12 max on everyone might not work if somebody big applied
for something bigger than a /12.
I'm still not following you.
What I believe has been proposed is that if the total amount of address
space under an entity's control is less than an aggregate /12 then no
needs assessment is performed to transfer address space.
If the org has a /12 or more of aggregate space, or they are requesting
space from the free pool, they have to go through a needs assessment.
There is no hard cap on the amount of address space an entity may have,
only what they have to do in order to get more.
Am I missing something?
-----Original Message-----
From: Brandon Ross [mailto:br...@pobox.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:11 PM
To: Steven Ryerse
Cc: Mike Burns; William Herrin; ARIN PPML
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] A Redefinition of IPv4 Need post ARIN
run-out(was:Re:Against 2013-4)
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013, Steven Ryerse wrote:
Don't know if a /12 cap would work if a big guy like tmobile or
Microsoft applied for a larger allocation. It is fine for most
organizations though.
Huh? Are you suggesting that Tmobile and Microsoft are incapable of completing
the needs justification process??
--
Brandon Ross Yahoo & AIM: BrandonNRoss
+1-404-635-6667 ICQ: 2269442
Schedule a meeting: https://doodle.com/bross Skype: brandonross
_______________________________________________
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.
