On Apr 11, 2016, at 5:06 PM, Owen DeLong <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Apr 11, 2016, at 12:24 , John Curran <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Since parties coming to ARIN are distinguishing between these classes of 4-byte ASNs and come back explicitly asking for one ≤65535, are you suggesting that ARIN not hold these lower ones to be able to satisfy such requests? Yes. I believe that we, more than any other region, have been lazy in our adoption of current internet technologies to the detriment of the internet at large. I believe that continuing to facilitate this is not providing a useful service to the internet as a whole. Just to be clear, you feel that ARIN registry policy which rapidly depletes the lower range of 4-byte ASNs would be technically sound and facilitate fair and impartial number resource administration? It would be helpful if you could explain how in some detail, given that there appears to be sufficient number of lower range 4-byte ASNs for those who require such for their operations, and further that the supply appears to be sufficient for quite some time (potentially till there is greater acceptance and far fewer hurdles with the use of higher range 4-byte ASNs...) Thanks! /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
_______________________________________________ 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.
