Hello Mike
What about new entrants ? I firmly see that new entrants and the most
important to be looked at as having a minimal allocation from the RIR is
the bare minimal condition for them to exist in the Internet in first
place and do minimal business, therefore any recovered addresses shoul
In view of your clarification, I support the proposal.
On 7/29/2019 05:22 PM, Chris Woodfield wrote:
John - this policy proposal does not prevent an organization from receiving
resources from the wait list under section 4.1.8 and subsequently doing an 8.2
transfer of other resources afterward
Hi Mike,
My purpose in authoring this proposal was to starve the Waiting list to
death by preventing further unpredictable influxes of addresses.
I would support allocating returned addresses to both 4.10 and 4.4 pools, or
whichever might need them most.
I know the 4.10 pool is largely untapp
John - this policy proposal does not prevent an organization from receiving
resources from the wait list under section 4.1.8 and subsequently doing an 8.2
transfer of other resources afterwards; it only prohibits a 4.1.8 wait list
application subsequent to doing an outbound 8.2 transfer.
It’s a
Having read the Problem Statement and understood what is being proposed, I'd
kindly advise that this policy should also consider allocating the returned
addresses not only to the ARIN 4.10 reserved pool - but also the ARIN 4.4
micro-allocation pool for critical infrastructure providers of the In
I generally support the goal of this proposal, but I wonder if a
one-time exception should be carved out for and organization which is
switching to IPv6, no longer needs a large IPv4 allocation or
assignment, and wishes to replace it with a new, much smaller
distribution? Would they be able to
I find it interesting the idea of privileging the pool dedicated to
facilitate IPv6 Deployment and I also agree with the comments below in
the sense that it's not very beneficial do most ARIN members due to max
size, /22, cannot be holding more than a /20.
However one point I couldn't identify
Totally support this draft policy. It makes sense and is fair and logic
to the IP assignment process.
Fernando
On 25/07/2019 13:26, ARIN wrote:
On 18 July 2019 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) advanced the following
Draft Policy to Recommended Draft Policy status:
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN
