On Sun, Oct 6, 2024 at 5:28 PM Denis Motova <[email protected]> wrote: > Like Fernando, I'm not entirely convinced that reducing the /22 to a /24 > offers significant benefits beyond potentially shortening the waiting list. > In my view, a /24 (256 IPs) feels quite limiting. I’d be more supportive > of a /23 (512 IPs), as a /24 seems too small to accommodate the growth\ > needs of startups and new businesses.
Hi Denis, Bear in mind that a startup or new business remains eligible to acquire addresses on the market even after receiving an allocation from the waiting list. I'm dubious of the proposition that an adequately funded startup can afford to wait for addresses to become available on the waiting list. The waiting list, in its current incarnation, seems to me like more of a tool for hobbyists and charities -- folks doing something on a shoestring budget that doesn't have to be done on a timeline. And of course folks gaming the system with manufactured justifications to get something for free. The latter group can afford to wait as long as it takes. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin [email protected] https://bill.herrin.us/ _______________________________________________ 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.
