On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 6:00 PM John Santos <j...@egh.com> wrote: I am opposed to proposal that ARIN should in general be facilitating entities being able to obtain from ARIN permanent allocations made to support temporary use for non-connected networks. It sounds like creating an inviting environment for potential spammers and fraud, and LIRs/ISPs should not be involved in this.
I would suggest a stance that IPv6 should be used for any new non- connected networks being created And applicants be required to prove that they have adequate justification for why they have existing IPv4 usage and it is not possible to meet their unique Non-Connected networking needs using IPv6 space and technology such as 464XLAT, and why it is also impractical to meet their requirement using RFC1918 space. If someone's use is so transient as to merit leasing, then perhaps ARIN could consider offering a process for providing a 90-day allocation from a block reserved for transient allocations for experimental use. > Someone needs to define "Non-Connected Network". I take it to mean "a > network that is not connected to the Global Internet." I.E. a private Yes... Non-Connected = A standalone IP network, or it might be part of a confederation of interconnected networks, but they choose: for whatever reason to not be globally reachable directly over the IP protocol. If the Non-connected network is truly standalone, then RFC1918 space should be adequate. --- -Jimmy _______________________________________________ ARIN-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: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.