Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Clean up definition of LIR/ISP vs. end-user (Steven Ryerse)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 01:45:20 +0000
From: Steven Ryerse <[email protected]>
To: Bill Darte <[email protected]>
Cc: ARIN-PPML List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Clean up definition of LIR/ISP vs. end-user
Message-ID:
<5b9e90747fa2974d91a54fcfa1b8ad1201313db...@eni-mail.eclipse-networks.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Bill thanks for your question!
It means that allocations should be made by a combination of the size of the
organization and the size of their network and maybe the total size of their
current allocations. There should never be a time when the allocation by Arin
is zero. Arin?s mission is to allocate - and it isn?t to not allocate.
We run a small data center and we run BGP and should easily be able to qualify
for a /22 (which I believe is the current minimum block size Arin allocates per
current policy) and maybe even qualify for a /21. We would never and should
never qualify for a /17 or a /18 as that is way too big for our size.
T-Mobile got something like three quarters of a /8 a while back and of course
their company and network size certainly could have justified that. We were
denied a /22 allocation ? the minimum size this ?community? has decided to
allocate - because of ?policy? and T-Mobile was not denied. That isn?t a level
playing field, adjusted for size of course, and all organizations should be
able to get right sized allocations without having to meet some arbitrary needs
test (and the current needs based allocation policies are very arbitrary) -
even if this community wants a needs test for whatever reason. I?ve said many
times that Arin?s mission is to allocate first and conserve sec
ond - and the conserve part should never override the allocate part of the
mission for any reason including IPv4 depletion. I don?t believe this community
should be able to override Arin?s mission statement without changing the
mission statement first.
I used to think that the current needs based policies were put in place to slow
IPv4 depletion but now I?m not so sure. I was shocked to see some recent
opinions in this forum that actual live installations of IPv6 should not be
able to be used to help justify an IPv4 allocation. Wow! I don?t know how
wide spread that opinion is in this community but I sure hope it doesn?t
prevail. It just shows how crazy any needs based policy really is and that all
needs based policies are arbitrary. It cements my belief that the whole Arin
Community very much needs and very much would benefit from a major rewrite of
all of the needs based policies a la
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2013-03
I will keep on advocating this as long as I can breathe until sanity prevails.
For those who argue that there is no other way to fix IPv4 depletion, I would
suggest that the free market will take care of that problem for us. Either
IPv6 will get adopted and depletion will be fixed that way - or - the free
market will find more IPv4 resources as needed a la
http://www.hilcobid.net/auction/listOffers.htm?auction_id=13186&elementsPerPage=25#barranavegacaoleilao
I for one prefer that the allocation process work within the charter of Arin -
but then I tried that route and was denied. Does this community really want me
and many others to go outside because of the arbitrary needs based policies. I
guess that is for this community to ultimately decide.
From: Bill Darte [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 7:53 PM
To: Steven Ryerse
Cc: Alexander, Daniel; Owen DeLong; ARIN-PPML List
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Clean up definition of LIR/ISP vs. end-user
Steven Ryerse wrote:
I believe that Arin and this community need to adopt a similar set of policies
like have been proposed in Europe
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2013-03 This would require a
wholesale rewrite of a lot of policies which I am not capable of doing - but
removing the needs requirements in all policies and just instituting
right-sizing policies would be in line with Arin?s mission and be best for all.
I would support anyone willing to take the time to submit a proposal to Arin
similar to the one above that has been proposed for RIPE.
Steven, please tell what right-sizing means to you and how that differs from
assigning addresses according to an explicit need...
Thanks,
bd
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Steven Ryerse
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I agree with Daniel. I strongly believe it is Arin?s charter and mission to
further the Internet and not impede access to it. Debating about what an
organization is doing on the Internet or what they are called is really a
discussion on how to limit access to the Internet. I don?t believe that Arin
should be trying to deny or limit an organization?s access to the Internet. I
believe Arin should be trying to expand the Internet for good of everyone as
was done before Arin?s existence. I?m all for right sizing an organizations
access with reasonable polices but I am not in favor of policies that have the
sole purpose of denying or restricting access to the Internet.
I believe that Arin and this community need to adopt a similar set of policies
like have been proposed in Europe
https://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2013-03 This would require a
wholesale rewrite of a lot of policies which I am not capable of doing - but
removing the needs requirements in all policies and just instituting
right-sizing policies would be in line with Arin?s mission and be best for all.
I would support anyone willing to take the time to submit a proposal to Arin
similar to the one above that has been proposed for RIPE.
Steven L Ryerse
President
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338
770.656.1460<tel:770.656.1460> - Cell
770.399.9099<tel:770.399.9099> - Office
770.392-0076<tel:770.392-0076> - Fax
[Description: Description: Description: Eclipse Networks Logo_small.png]?
Eclipse Networks, Inc.
Conquering Complex Networks?
From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] On
Behalf Of Alexander, Daniel
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2013 3:54 PM
To: Owen DeLong; ARIN-PPML List
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Clean up definition of LIR/ISP vs. end-user
I suggest it is a worthwhile conversation to explore why they will be necessary?
If the Internet is a network of networks, why does ARIN, an RIR, need to make
the distinctions in how it allocates or assigns resources? Why shouldn't ARIN
simply allocate resources to networks, regardless of how they operate simply
based on what they need?
Are we over complicating things, not only for the Registry, but for those who
don't do this for a living who are struggling to understand what all this means
and why?
This goes back to the original PI/PA debate. There are End User networks that
dwarf many ISP/LIR networks and vise versa. Why should we maintain multiple
layers of requirements to justify IPv4 transfers and an exceedingly large pool
of IPv6 space?
-Dan
From: Owen DeLong <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 11:36:30 -0700
To: Microsoft Office User
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: ARIN-PPML List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Clean up definition of LIR/ISP vs. end-user
Dan,
The definitions apply to IPv6 as well.
I believe they are still necessary.
Owen
On Apr 29, 2013, at 20:37 , "Alexander, Daniel"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
Hello All,
I would be curious to hear people's opinions of whether the distinctions are
still necessary within ARIN policy. Once the IPv4 free pool is depleted, and
the policies become focused on processing transfers, do we need to distinguish
between End Users, non-End Users, and PA vs PI within ARIN policy?
What are the criteria in which these distinctions matter, and will they still
apply next year?
Dan
ARIN AC
From: Scott Leibrand <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:41:56 -0700
To: ARIN-PPML List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [arin-ppml] Clean up definition of LIR/ISP vs. end-user
At ARIN 31 last week, Leslie's Policy Experience Report (slides at
https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_31/PDF/monday/nobile_policy.pdf
or
https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_31/PPT/monday/nobile_policy.pptx)
reported that, in ARIN staff's experience, the NRPM does not adequately define
ISP/LIR vs. end-user. For example, by literally applying the existing
definitions as currently written, my employer would be neither an ISP nor and
end-user, because while they do not *primarily* assign address space to users,
neither do they *exclusively* use it in their own networks. So I think those
definitions need a few tweaks.
I would propose that the primary difference between ISPs/LIRs vs. end-users,
for purposes of the NRPM, is whether an organization reassigns address blocks
to third parties. If an organization maintains full control of all of the
equipment on its network, and doesn't need to make any reassignments to other
organizations, then it can qualify as an end-user. In particular, an end user
organization must be able to supply a full list of all the IP addresses in use
on its network, and know what devices are using those addresses.
An ISP/LIR, on the other hand, should be defined by whether they delegate that
responsibility to another organization. In that case, they need to reassign
the network space via SWIP/rwhois, which makes them an LIR.
I understand that there are other considerations, such as the expectation in
the security community that addresses within an ISP allocation are generally
controlled by third parties, whereas addresses in an end-user assignment are
generally controlled by the end-user organization. However, I don't believe
it's practical to try to draw a distinction there: rather, organizations can
decide for themselves whether they need to make reassignments (for that or
several other reasons), and that decision can drive whether they are considered
an ISP/LIR or end-user for purposes of ARIN policy.
In light of the above, I would propose the following revised definitions:
2.4. Local Internet Registry (LIR)
The terms Internet Service Provider (ISP) and LIR are used interchangeably in
this document. A Local Internet Registry (LIR) is an IR that assigns address
space to the users of the network services that it provides. Therefore, LIRs /
ISPs are organizations that reassign addresses to end users and/or reallocate
addresses to other ISPs/LIRs.
2.6. End-user
An end-user is an organization receiving assignments of IP addresses
exclusively for use in its operational networks, and does not register any
reassignments of that space.
Thoughts? Should I submit this as a policy proposal?
-Scott
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this
message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List
([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>). Unsubscribe or manage your
mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List
([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List
([email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20130501/83abb7ab/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1473 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL:
<http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20130501/83abb7ab/attachment.jpg>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 94, Issue 50
*****************************************
