Updated ARIN allocation information

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Sat Feb 1 15:16:19 UTC 2014

On Feb 1, 2014, at 8:42 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

> While the policy text does not spell out a list of technologies, I believe
> that the clear intent of the community from the discussions and from
> the examples given in the policy text was for minimal IPv4 allocations
> to support the transition process. While no ratio is given in the policy
> text, I doubt that a “we have 200 customers wanting to do 6RD” would
> be accepted as justification for a /24.
> However, I am merely speculating here. I don’t have any direct answers
> from ARIN staff about how the policy would be interpreted. My statements
> are strictly my own personal interpretation of the community intent and
> an expression of my intent as the author of the policy.

Owen - 
   To be clear, ARIN is inclined to approve requests whenever it is possible
   to do such in compliance with policy.  Given the leeway in the present 
   policy text, we're likely to approve any reasonable request which is made
   under this policy, and it would not be difficult to imagine requests for
   /24 being approved as a result.  If pooled use/oversubscription or specific 
   technologies are required, it would be very helpful to provide additional
   policy text to staff.


John Curran
President and CEO

More information about the NANOG mailing list