Steven,
In your "right sized allocations" vision for policy is it necessary for
a large company with a /8 to demonstrate that they are using the current
/8 they have before they can get another one? How long after they get
there new /8 can they ask for another one, 1 day, 1 month, 1 year, 2
years..?
Thanks
On 7/15/13 15:23 , Steven Ryerse wrote:
If you are publicly traded and your company’s revenues are public then
the size of the company is available to all. This could be used to make
sure only a large organization who might actually have use for it can
get a /8 or other large block size. The other info that could be used
is how much resource does an org have now. If they have a /8 they might
really have use for another /8. If they have a /22 they might really
have use for another /22. Obviously the org with a /22 isn’t likely to
have use for a /8. Orgs with multiple allocations already can add them
together including legacy blocks. An org that has no allocation or one
up to a /22 allocation should be able to qualify for the currently
defined minimum sized block which I believe is currently a /22 . The
rare case where an org with a very small or no current allocation has
use for a very large block can be handled as an exception with more
proof required that the block they are requesting – I’m thinking this
would require a manager at ARIN to handle. I’m guessing it is rare that
an org needs to add more than double what they already have allocated
and those can be special cases handled as exceptions with additional
proof required. In this way the blocks allocated are right sized for
the size of the org requesting the allocation. There are some smart
folks in this community who might be able to tweak this idea and make it
better, especially for larger allocations.
/Steven L Ryerse/
/President/
/100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338/
/770.656.1460 - Cell/
/770.399.9099 - Office/
/770.392-0076 - Fax/
Description: Description: Description: Eclipse Networks
Logo_small.png℠Eclipse Networks, Inc.
^ Conquering Complex Networks ^℠ ^
*From:*Blake Dunlap [mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:* Monday, July 15, 2013 3:01 PM
*To:* Steven Ryerse
*Cc:* Matthew Wilder; David Farmer; [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles -
revised
Exactly how is this "right sized allocation" based on network size
different than needs basis allocation?
-Blake
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 11:02 AM, Steven Ryerse
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Note that I did say "right sized allocations" and have said multiple
times that it is fine to match allocations with the size of the
organization and/or the size of the organization's current network. I
also have stated that we need to be good technical stewards and I think
most folks here agree with that. I do not think a small organization
like ours for example should ever get the technical equivalent of a /8
or even close to it. I do strongly think that every organization should
be able to get a right sized allocation if they are going to use it as
that grows the Internet - which in case folks forget is ARIN's mission.
Steven L Ryerse
President
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338
770.656.1460 - Cell
770.399.9099 - Office
770.392-0076 - Fax
℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
Conquering Complex Networks℠
--
================================================
David Farmer Email: [email protected]
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 1-612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 1-612-812-9952
================================================
_______________________________________________
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.
