Martin,

> On Apr 15, 2015, at 10:01 PM, Martin Hannigan <[email protected]> wrote:
> This bar was intended to prevent anyone who wanted their own address space 
> from getting it and routing it, and contributing to the global routing table.
> 
> Do we have pointers to the list archive to support that? I'd be interesting 
> to see who proposed it, who supported it and the discussion. The AC has 
> archives all the way back, IIRC.

IIUC, "this bar" pre-dated the AC (and ARIN).  I believe InterNIC had a policy 
that they would only allocate address space if you could demonstrate you had 
efficiently utilized the (/20?) address space that had been given to you by 
your upstream provider.  I remember discussions with Kim in which she was quite 
concerned (with reason) that if InterNIC were to allocate to all comers, the 
routers of the day (mid-90's) would fall over, resulting in prefix-length 
filters and other general unpleasantness (e.g., annoying Sean Doran).  RIPE-NCC 
and APNIC, having a relatively smaller customer base (the telcos believed OSI 
was the One True Future, so there were only those weird academic and 
entrepreneur types that were looking at this TCP/IP thing), didn't really worry 
about blowing up the routing tables, rather they were primarily interested in 
driving increased penetration of that TCP/IP thing.

This historic interlude brought to you by a very nice 
http://www.freemanwinery.com/wine/overview/2011-Russian-River-Valley-Pinot-Noir 
:)

Regards,
-drc

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.

Reply via email to