[83106] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: /8 end user assignment?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Conrad)
Fri Aug 5 03:20:28 2005
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0508042352030.11897@twin.uoregon.edu>
Cc: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>, nanog@merit.edu
From: David Conrad <david.conrad@nominum.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 00:18:46 -0700
To: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@darkwing.uoregon.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Hi,
>>> If you can justify a /8, ARIN will allocate one to you (not that
>>> I speak for ARIN or anything, but that's how things work).
>>> Presumably Softbank BB justified the /8 APNIC allocated to them.
>> I don't know about APNIC, but ARIN's rules are generally
>> structured to make justification of a /8 all but impossible.
Justin: I would be interested in understanding why you feel this to
be the case (not that I'm disagreeing with you, rather I'm actually
curious). In theory, justification for a /8 is no more impossible
than justification for a /19. Of course, justifying a /8 will
require proportionally more information than for a /19, but I
wouldn't imagine this would be impossible.
>> I suspect this is actually a typo or misreading of some sort.
I don't believe it is.
> The business of the rir's is providing ip addresses to their
> members. if withholding the remaining address space became more
> important than supporting the needs of the community of interest,
> then they've obviously failed their membership.
Yes. More to the point, given ARIN's policies, like the other RIRs,
are defined in open public policy meetings, it would indicate either
the community of interest desired the policies to be that way or the
ARIN staff had run amok. I do not believe either to be the case.
Rgds,
-drc
