[170072] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: arin representation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Curran)
Sun Mar 23 23:36:26 2014
From: John Curran <jcurran@arin.net>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 03:35:59 +0000
In-Reply-To: <m2ob0xp4nu.wl%randy@psg.com>
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mar 23, 2014, at 6:53 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> two questions:
>=20
> o of the /24s in the arin region, what percentage are owned by arin
> members?
Randy -=20
Happy to generate these - two questions for clarity.
1) Should we expand /16's and /8's into the corresponding number of /24's ?
(or do you only want those blocks issued originally as /24's to be count=
ed)
2) In terms of categories, we could go strictly with /24's held by ARIN me=
mbers=20
versus /24's held by non-members (and resulting percentages); note that=
would=20
be predominantly ISPs since end-users assignments from ARIN are unlikel=
y to be=20
members unless they specifically opted to join. Alternatively, we could=
provide=20
counts /24's under RSA, /24's under LRSA, and /24's legacy-no-agreement=
as the=20
three categories of counts desired (and each percentage of the total)
So, based on above, would you prefer the /24 space statistics as asked=
=20
(member/non-member) or rsa/lrsa/legacy-no-agreement?
> o of the address holders in the arin region, what percentage are arin
> members?
Will do.
Thanks!
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN
