On Apr 30, 2013, at 1:46 AM, Jimmy Hess <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4/29/13, John Curran <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Apr 29, 2013, at 2:46 PM, Lee Howard <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On 4/29/13 1:03 AM, "Jérôme Nicolle" <[email protected]> wrote: >> specified (based on being singly-homed or multi-homed.) These same >> criteria now apply to receipt of an address block via transfer, so at >> regional IPv4 free pool depletion may be _very_ difficult to satisfy. > > Huh? Where did that concept come from?
Alas, NRPM 8.3 requires that "the recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of IP address resources _under current ARIN policies_ ..." which requires that transfer recipients be able demonstrate need per current IPv4 allocation or allocation policies. If you could not qualify for any IPv4 assignment or allocation from ARIN, then you are not a valid recipient. This language (or very similar) has been in the 8.3 transfer policy since inception in 2009 <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2009_1.html> and effectively links transfers to same needs-determination language as used for assignments (only allowing for a much larger block to be transferred at 24-months than the ISP 3-month allocation size.) FYI, /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
