Kevin Loch

O papel público, as decisões ou a participação jurídica documentados de Kevin Loch podem influenciar investimentos em redes, acesso ao mercado, políticas de infraestrutura ou limites de responsabilidade; este dossiê separa os registros citados da verificação do cargo atual.

Os dados disponíveis abrangem Cargos: Co-author of ARIN policy proposal 2005-1.

Mais recente 2026-09-26

Cargos: Co-author of ARIN policy proposal 2005-1

Evidências

Papel público: As fontes públicas citadas identificam Kevin Loch como uma pessoa ligada a decisões, litígios, governança ou operações relevantes para a infraestrutura da internet; o cargo e a afiliação atuais ainda precisam ser verificados.

Detalhes relacionados

Kevin Loch
New proposal by Kevin Loch merged with
public people profile
Kevin Loch
From : Kevin Loch <kloch () hotnic net>
public people profile

Última atualização: 2026-09-26

Cargos

Role:Co-author of ARIN policy proposal 2005-1Ainda não avaliadoHistórico

Fatos com fonte

Participação em políticas RIR

1RIRs com participação

5Políticas com participação

9Mensagens de política

30 de ago. de 2005Primeira participação

27 de abr. de 2006Última participação

ARIN-2005-12005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sitesPropõe alternativa · 2 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
Loch proposes a large, stable, well-known range for provider-independent assignments so operators can apply different prefix limits by range. He leaves open whether the reservation should be global or per RIR. One retained contribution cannot establish a subsequent change or sustained position.
2005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sites
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · Loch proposes a large, stable, well-known range for provider-independent assignments so operators can apply different prefix limits by range. He leaves open whether the reservation should be global or per RIR. One retained contribution cannot establish a subsequent change or sustained position.
Condições: The /16 is a proposed reserved range, not a proposed /16 assignment to every end site. · The comment is a design suggestion rather than an unconditional vote on the whole policy.
27 de abr. de 2006
This is why it is important to have a large well known and static range (like a /16) set aside for PI assignments.
27 de abr. de 2006
Whether a /16 should be set aside by each RIR or one globally is an interesting question.
2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure · 2005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sites
Avaliação: Coerente · A /96 for small internal uses and a large reserved range containing public provider-independent assignments solve different routing problems. The former aims to reduce accidental announcements; the latter makes public assignment ranges recognisable to filters. The numerical prefix difference therefore does not establish a contradiction.
Condições: This comparison depends on the stated internal-use and public-assignment contexts. · It does not establish how Loch would resolve every routing-table or address-utilisation tradeoff.
20 de abr. de 2006
Would a /96 be sufficient if the intended use is for /126-/128's? That might also reduce the concern about them being inadvertantly announced.
27 de abr. de 2006
different minimum prefix size limits by range. This is why it is important to have a large well known and static range (like a /16) set aside for PI assignments.
ARIN-2005-92005-9: 4-Byte AS NumberDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada
ARIN-2006-22006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal InfrastructurePropõe alternativa · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência
Loch asks whether a /96 would suffice for /126 to /128 internal uses and might reduce accidental announcements. This establishes a conditional design suggestion, not a final vote or a sequence of positions from which consistency over time could be assessed.
2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure
Avaliação: Evidências insuficientes para avaliar a consistência · Loch asks whether a /96 would suffice for /126 to /128 internal uses and might reduce accidental announcements. This establishes a conditional design suggestion, not a final vote or a sequence of positions from which consistency over time could be assessed.
Condições: The proposed size is conditional on the intended internal use; the message does not prove that the proposal adopted it.
20 de abr. de 2006
Would a /96 be sufficient if the intended use is for /126-/128's? That might also reduce the concern about them being inadvertantly announced.
2006-2: Micro-allocations for Internal Infrastructure · 2005-1: Provider Independent IPv6 Assignments for End-sites
Avaliação: Coerente · A /96 for small internal uses and a large reserved range containing public provider-independent assignments solve different routing problems. The former aims to reduce accidental announcements; the latter makes public assignment ranges recognisable to filters. The numerical prefix difference therefore does not establish a contradiction.
Condições: This comparison depends on the stated internal-use and public-assignment contexts. · It does not establish how Loch would resolve every routing-table or address-utilisation tradeoff.
20 de abr. de 2006
Would a /96 be sufficient if the intended use is for /126-/128's? That might also reduce the concern about them being inadvertantly announced.
ARIN-prop-18ARIN-prop-18: IPv6 Direct assignments to end sitesDesconhecida · 4 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada
ARIN-prop-20ARIN-prop-20: 4-Byte AS Number Policy ProposalDesconhecida · 1 Mensagens de discussão
Coerência do ponto de vista: Nenhuma posição explícita declarada