Hi Quantum, Disallowing out of region justification for those with less than a /22 in region is an issue for anyone with less than a /22, whether they are looking to get addresses from a broker or private transfer. Not all 8.3 transfers are through brokers. The original part of this proposal was strictly about who can use their out of region need for justification, not about how they were going to get the addresses.
I don't have any ulterior motives in proposing this; I sell an IPv4 block either way. I just see the requirement of a /22 for in region use to be discriminatory against the little guy. The waiting list has been a big help to organizations, especially back in 2022 when the wait was a maximum of 90 days and prices on the transfer market were high and sellers scarce. The wait time did balloon up to 2 years; it looks like it is down to about 9 months now. So in the case of organizations needing addresses now, the waiting list is not an option now, nor has been in the past, except for a brief period of a year or so after the Micfo pause. There has also been abuse of the waiting list, however it was justified. We have run into sellers of waiting list addresses, some quite soon after getting them. If I'm not mistaken ARIN is aware of waiting list addresses showing up on leasing platforms soon after being distributed. In discussions of this original proposal the subject of the waiting list came up, and others like myself were a bit surprised that out of region usage could be used to justify space from the waiting list. Many of us were of the opinion that the waiting list should be reserved for those who need space in region. After all, it is the ARIN waiting list. Hence the addition of it to this proposal. It certainly won't stop waiting list abuse, but it should cut it down. I think the 8.3 loophole is a bit far-fetched; to my knowledge ARIN does not police how a recipient routes a block, except perhaps if/when the recipient requests more space. So that waiting list recipient can route the block however they want with no penalty. If the recipient transfers the block 5 years or more after receiving it, and the recipient of that transfer uses it out of region, whether justified in or out, I don't see that as a major issue and doubt that ARIN would either. I do agree that these would probably be better as two separate proposals, but they are related, and with the time and energy it takes to make and promote a proposal, linking them is just easier. Regards, Eddie -----Original Message----- From: ARIN-PPML <[email protected]> On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2026 12:00 PM To: [email protected] Subject: ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 254, Issue 3 Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 254, Issue 2 (Eddie Stauble) 2. Re: ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 254, Issue 2 (Quantum) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 23:09:39 -0400 From: "Eddie Stauble" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 254, Issue 2 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Thanks Chris and hi Quantum, Thank you for your thoughts regarding this proposal. As the original author of this policy, I wanted to chime in. As an IPv4 broker, I run into several cases per year where a small company is based in the US but has a branch office elsewhere in the world. They have a /24 for BGP here in the US, and want to do the same in the UK. Under existing policy, they cannot use their need in the UK for justification since they have less than a /22 in region. So they end up going to RIPE. They would rather just keep it all in ARIN. This proposal would allow them to do that. The waiting list should be used for those who have a need in the ARIN region. It would be helpful if ARIN could provide information on how often out of region needs demonstration is currently used to get address space from the waiting list. Prohibiting out of region needs justification from the waiting list might be better as a separate proposal. Though as I've come to find out, in the real world these proposals move at a snail's pace, and in that sense I think they need to be tied together. Like Chris, I don't see a problem with anycast; if announced at all in ARIN, it's in region. Good point about 4.4 and 4.10 space. Based on these and earlier comments, I do think that the suggested option 1 could be changed to: Out of Region usage justification may not be used to receive IPv4 addresses from the ARIN Waitlist (4.1.8). Organizations on the Waiting List at the time this policy takes effect shall be exempted and will not be affected by this change. Regards, Eddie Stauble -----Original Message----- From: ARIN-PPML <[email protected]> On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Monday, August 3, 2026 12:00 PM To: [email protected] Subject: ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 254, Issue 2 Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to [email protected] To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to [email protected] You can reach the person managing the list at [email protected] When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Request for Comment & Feedback: Draft Policy ARIN-2025-3: Change Section 9 Out Of Region Use Minimum Criteria (Chris Woodfield) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 10:36:14 -0700 From: Chris Woodfield <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Request for Comment & Feedback: Draft Policy ARIN-2025-3: Change Section 9 Out Of Region Use Minimum Criteria Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Furthermore, the total prohibition of out-of-region usage > justification the waiting list now puts global anycast deployments, which necessarily involves announcing the same subnet simultaneously inside and outside of the ARIN region, in a grey area. By phrasing it this way, it invites further questions and may cause ARIN staff to reject any waiting list justification that involves anycast, which is permissible under ARIN policy today. I don't think this is something we want to do. > To comment on this particular point - in my experience, anycast has never been interpreted as out of region use, as long as at least one site advertising the routes is within the ARIN region. If the potential for this to be interpreted differently is a concern for the community, language making this nuance explicit would be ripe for a new policy proposal. Regards, -Chris -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20260802/0fa9511c/at tachment-0001.htm> ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML mailing list [email protected] https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml ------------------------------ End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 254, Issue 2 ***************************************** ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2026 01:25:28 -0400 From: Quantum <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 254, Issue 2 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed" Hi Eddie, On 2026/8/3 23:09, Eddie Stauble via ARIN-PPML wrote: > As an IPv4 broker, I run into several cases per year where a small > company is based in the US but has a branch office elsewhere in the > world. They have a /24 for BGP here in the US, and want to do the > same in the UK. Under existing policy, they cannot use their need in > the UK for justification since they have less than a /22 in region. So they end up going to RIPE. > They would rather just keep it all in ARIN. This proposal would allow > them to do that. What I am struggling to understand is why this is a problem only for users of IPv4 brokers and not users of the IPv4 waiting list. If the same small company wanted to use the ARIN waiting list instead of purchasing IPv4 space from you, they would run into the exact same problem. > The waiting list should be used for those who have a need in the ARIN > region. It is not clear to me why this should be the case. In my opinion, if using space out-of-region is something that ARIN permits, then it should be permitted for all ARIN members. I don't believe ARIN membership should be divided into two separate classes: those who use IPv4 brokers, and those who use the waiting list, with the former allowed to get space for out-of-region uses and the latter prohibited from doing so.?I don't believe this is good for the health of the ARIN community. Furthermore, if ARIN waiting list space is to be reserved for in-region use exclusively, then section 8.3 transfers becomes a loophole. One could obtain space under the ARIN waiting list, wait 60 months for the prohibition against transfer under section 4.1.8 to expire, and then transfer the space under section 8.3 to another ARIN member, who is suddenly allowed to use it out-of-region. I don't think this creates the right incentives. Under the current proposal, ARIN would also be forced to track whether a specific block is permitted to be used out-of-region and which ones aren't, based on how the member received the space. If we wish to plug the aforementioned section 8.3 loophole by allowing the out-of-region ban to carry over after a transfer, ARIN would be forced to do even more bookkeeping. A question for ARIN staff is whether this is something they can reasonably do, and whether it makes sense for ARIN to police this. In my opinion,?draft policy ARIN-2025-3 should either permit out-of-region use with a single IPv4 /24 in region for everyone, or be abandoned outright. If the concern is the waiting list being abused, then I suggest we institute some other requirement that applies equally to all members, regardless of whether they get space from section 4.1.8 or section 8. Best regards, Quantum -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20260804/c96d8296/at tachment-0001.htm> ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML mailing list [email protected] https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml ------------------------------ End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 254, Issue 3 ***************************************** _______________________________________________ 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.
