> On Nov 25, 2013, at 11:11 AM, David Huberman <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Scott Leibrand wrote: > >> I'm not sure that it would be a good idea, though, to let >> any organization, not matter how small, get an IPv4 /24 >> from ARIN's free pool without any real restrictions. > > Can you please provide a technical argument for why one organization should > receive a /24 > from ARIN, but another organization should not? In your response, please > explain > why the internet operates better when an end-user (whatever that means) can > get a /24, > but an ISP cannot.
That wasn't the distinction I was referring to. I am saying that I'm not sure we want to let an org (regardless of type) who only needs a /28 get a /24 from ARIN. In addition to keeping that minimum level of needs justification, the only technical distinction I would retain in my proposed liberalization would be that multihomed orgs should be able to get blocks as small as a /24 from ARIN (as they'll be going into BGP regardless) whereas single-homed orgs should still go to their upstream for up to a /22. Again, no distinction between end-user and ISP orgs. I'd also welcome your input on the proposed text. -Scott _______________________________________________ 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: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
