On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 1:00 AM, John Santos <[email protected]> wrote: > Oppose 2014-14 > > 1) /16 is not "small"
This is the main problem I have with 2014-14. Start with /24's or maybe /22's and keep track of what happens to them. Then use the knowledge gained to formulate a better policy when expanding the process to larger blocks. I think it also needs a limit on the number of untested transfers in which an organization can participate in a given time period. The text itself needs some cleanup to deal with the more obvious unintended consequences, but the /16 boundary is what kills it for me. On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Seth Mattinen <[email protected]> wrote: > Then make it /18 to align with the fee schedule definition of "small". I ran a regional ISP on two /18's. You're not getting the concept of "small." Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ [email protected] [email protected] Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/> May I solve your unusual networking challenges? _______________________________________________ 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.
