In message <CAEmG1=qFDkYVaSpbygZsusQVUvvH=y5j_-zq9okl4tejddh...@mail.gmail.com> Matthew Petach <[email protected]> wrote:
>Oy vey. > >It almost seems like people don't know how ARIN works. :( > >Look, let's talk in plain and simple language. > >When you apply for number resources, you're doing so based on your >current *and forecasted* needs for up to two years in the future. [0] > >When ARIN staff reviews your submission, they're looking at your >*plans* for the future to evaluate whether those plans fit with the >NRPM requirements. > >They cannot see into the future. Just to be clear, I was questioning the -membership- in this case... *not* the resource requests *or* the associated allocations that were ultimately granted in response to those (resource) requests. But you are correct that if ARIN had (which I see now John is asserting it had not, back in 2012) required the prospective member to demonstrate that it already had a significant presence in the region then that might have (or might now have, for new applicant) represented a kind of Catch-22 situation where they might have to say "Yes, we *plan* on operating within the region, and we'll begin doing so AS SOON AS you give us a membership and some number resources." I'll be frank in saying that I have no idea how such a Catch-22 could be or should be resolved. So I supposed that it is just very fortunate that it likely doesn't even come up that often. Regards, rfg _______________________________________________ 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.
