Thanks Andrew, and good catch - both Scott and I missed that clause, obviously. 
It appears that this is in place in order to meet the stated goal of this 
proposal being revenue-neutral for ARIN? If so, it would be great to clarify so 
that community members can make a more informed evaluation as to whether or not 
to support the clause. If there are other justifications for the clause’s 
presence, I’d be interested to hear them.

Thanks,

-C

> On Oct 11, 2020, at 10:24 AM, Andrew Dul <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> The current draft policy text disallows returns to lower than a /36, so
> I would say that organization which took a /36 would not be permitted to
> go down to a /40.
> 
> "Partial returns of any IPv6 allocation that results in less than a /36
> of holding are not permitted regardless of the ISP’s current or former
> IPv4 number resource holdings."
> 
> Andrew
> 
> On 10/9/2020 2:04 PM, Chris Woodfield wrote:
>> Hi Scott,
>> 
>> Given that ARIN utilizes a sparse allocation strategy for IPv6 resources (in 
>> my organization’s case, we could go from a /32 to a /25 without 
>> renumbering), IMO it would not be unreasonable for the allocation to be 
>> adjusted down simply by changing the mask and keeping the /36 or /32 
>> unallocated until the sparse allocations are exhausted. Any resources 
>> numbered outside the new /40 would need to be renumbered, to be sure, but 
>> that’s most likely less work than a complete renumbering.
>> 
>> That said, I’ll leave it up to Registration Services to provide a definitive 
>> answer.
>> 
>> -C
>> 
>>> On Fri, 9 Oct 2020, [email protected] wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi All,
>>>> 
>>>> I am in favor of this draft, and am curious as to how resource holders who 
>>>> were not dissuaded by the fee increase will be impacted by the policy 
>>>> change. While they indeed have more address space than /40, they may also 
>>>> not need the additional address space.  Some might prefer the 
>>>> nano-allocation given the lower cost.  Will they be required to change 
>>>> allocations, and renumber, in order to return to 3x-small status and 
>>>> associated rate?
>>>> 
>>>> Scott Johnson
>>>> SolarNetOne, Inc.
>>>> AS32639
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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:
>>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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:
>>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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:
>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.

Reply via email to