Yes of course there is some right-sizing intertwined with needs testing in
existing policies which blurs the actual real-life effect. You make my point
in your description of what happens with allocation requests. When a larger
organization requests a larger block they probably will come away from it with
an allocation, possibly smaller than requested (and prefer) but they are likely
to receive an allocation none the less. When a small organization requests the
minimum block size and that request is refused because of policy, they get
nothing at all. No matter how you slice it that is an un-even playing field
and is arbitrary, unfair, and discriminatory against small organizations in
favor of larger ones. I have been pointing this out for years and I've said it
just about every way I know how. It is time this gets corrected to level the
playing field for all. The needs tests need to go!
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℠
-----Original Message-----
From: Owen DeLong [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, June 6, 2014 12:25 AM
To: Steven Ryerse
Cc: John Santos; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] About needs basis in 8.3 transfers
On Jun 5, 2014, at 7:10 PM, Steven Ryerse <[email protected]> wrote:
> My post was in fact the lines below with the single > in front of them.
>
> Yes I have advocated right-sizing instead of needs testing several times.
> Right sizing and needs testing have some similarities and in my opinion are
> easily confused. A needs test ends up in a pass fail or yes no outcome and
> you either get the requested resources or you don’t. I would add this needs
> testing can easily be used by the haves to keep the have nots from receiving
> any resources at all, and in my opinion that is happening. However with a
> right-sizing test, the outcome always ends up with an allocation being made
> (or offered) even if it turns out to only be the size of the current policy
> Minimum. This is a huge difference for a small organization and it levels
> the playing field for smaller organizations!
If that is your definition of needs testing, then in my experience ARIN already
engages in “right-sizing” because many times when I was unable to convince them
that my client qualified for what we asked for, they suggested a longer prefix
(smaller amount of addresses) that they would approve immediately. We would
usually accept their offer with a request that they reserve the original
request amount if possible. Then we would implement and fully utilize the
original approval and go back for the rest. This usually worked quite well.
> I realize that an organization might be allocated (or offered) a smaller
> allocation than requested, but all organizations can at least get the
> smallest allocation per the current policy minimum - not always the perfect
> situation but a lot better than zero resources. Further I don't think this
> hurts the haves at all (except maybe more competition), and I do not agree
> that "without needs testing the "haves" would have had it all a long time
> ago" - as long as right-sizing tests are applied to all.
I think that recent policy changes have improved this. I would welcome policy
proposals that further improved the situation.
Removing needs basis from 8.3 transfers doesn’t do that and it has a number of
other harmful outcomes as previously discussed.
Owen
_______________________________________________
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.
