On Sep 4, 2014, at 8:49 AM, Bruce Cornett <[email protected]> wrote:
> For what it is worth, I think this is a good policy for the smaller guys. > > I have two clients that desperately want their own allocation. One runs a > WISP with a /24 and the other high security cloud stack with a /22. > > Both need to double immediately. And I hate parting with the address space. > They cannot meet the /20 criteria and giving them addresses from our space > limits our business model - because granting that won't push us to the point > where we can request more. And dual homing them doesn't do anything for my > business. In about two weeks, they will be able to qualify at the /24 level, and the /20 criteria completely goes away based on policy which has already been adopted and is pending implementation. Given that, do you still see a need for this proposal? 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.
