arin representation

Naslund, Steve SNaslund at
Mon Mar 24 03:46:11 UTC 2014

Exactly right John.  I think the term "owned" is a problem here.

It seems to me that the terms would correctly be "holder" or who the address space was issued to or "user" being the end user using that space.

Wouldn't all of the holders be ARIN members unless grandfathered in?

Steven Naslund
Chicago IL

-----Original Message-----
From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran at] 
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 10:36 PM
To: Randy Bush
Cc: North American Network Operators' Group
Subject: Re: arin representation

On Mar 23, 2014, at 6:53 PM, Randy Bush <randy at> wrote:

> two questions:
>  o of the /24s in the arin region, what percentage are owned by arin
>    members?

Randy - 

  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 counted)

2)  In terms of categories, we could go strictly with /24's held by ARIN members 
    versus /24's held by non-members (and resulting percentages); note that would 
    be predominantly ISPs since end-users assignments from ARIN are unlikely to be 
    members unless they specifically opted to join. Alternatively, we could provide 
    counts /24's under RSA, /24's under LRSA, and /24's legacy-no-agreement as the 
    three categories of counts desired (and each percentage of the total)

    So, based on above, would you prefer the /24 space statistics as asked 
    (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.


John Curran
President and CEO

More information about the NANOG mailing list