Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks

> On Sep 28, 2015, at 11:50 , Bill Buhler wrote: > > Thanks Owen for your thoughts, it sounds to me like we are getting a lot > closer to a compromise, would this be a sufficient circuit breaker: > > Small end users and ISPs are allowed initial and follow up transfers up to a

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks

OK, how about this: Small end users and ISPs are allowed to obtain IPv4 address blocks without a needs test as long as the following criteria are met: a. The total size of their ARIN allocations at any time of the process does not exceed a /20 if a ISP or /22 for an end user. b.

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks

I’m not going to support anything that provides a blanket exemption from needs basis. I will support a change which allows an initial allocation/assignment/transfer of a minimal block of addresses (up to a /22 for an end-user or up to a /20 for an ISP seems reasonable to me) so long as it also

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks

Thanks Owen for your thoughts, it sounds to me like we are getting a lot closer to a compromise, would this be a sufficient circuit breaker: Small end users and ISPs are allowed initial and follow up transfers up to a /20 for ISPs or /22 for end users from the market. These transfers can be

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks

I could live with this. Do you need help putting it into a proposal template? Owen > On Sep 28, 2015, at 12:59 , Bill Buhler wrote: > > OK, how about this: > > Small end users and ISPs are allowed to obtain IPv4 address blocks without a > needs test as long as the following

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-10: Minimum IPv6 Assignments

Thanks, Matt This is precisely the subject on which I hoped to get community feedback. John Springer On Sat, 26 Sep 2015, Matthew Petach wrote: OPPOSED How I subdivide and allocate addresses internally and downstream is not a matter for the community to vote on; that's between me and my

[arin-ppml] Fwd: Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks

-- Forwarded message -- From: Jose R. de la Cruz III Date: Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 10:18 AM Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks To: John Curran

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks

Bill, Great compromise proposal. Can you clarify your point b) -- why limit the number of inbound transfers to reach n size in a ? Thanks, Mark From: "Bill Buhler" To: "owen" Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 12:59:30 PM

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks

On Sep 28, 2015 1:11 PM, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > I’m not going to support anything that provides a blanket exemption from needs basis. > > I will support a change which allows an initial allocation/assignment/transfer of a minimal block of addresses (up to a /22 for an end-user

Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4 netblocks

I would love some help. From: Owen DeLong [mailto:o...@delong.com] Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 3:20 PM To: Bill Buhler Cc: Adam Thompson; arin-ppml@arin.net Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2015-9: Eliminating needs-based evaluation for Section 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4 transfers of IPv4