Because as an end-user so long as we have IPv4, I count addresses assigned to hosts, while as an ISP, I count networks delegated to subscribers.
In IPv6, it might be more plausible to homogenize, but still, as an end-user, I generally count sites (physical locations) while as an ISP, I count customer sites supported + my sites + subordinate ISPs delegated. I think that the differences in policy (even in a transfer regime for IPv4) are, in fact meaningful in this regard. Owen > On Dec 6, 2015, at 19:32 , David Huberman <david.huber...@microsoft.com> > wrote: > > So I thought Jose’s email was very spot on. <> > > But I question the relevance of ANY distinction between ISP and End-user in > 2016. In what way does the operator community benefit from a difference in > rules (especially wrt Whois)? If we put aside the ARIN billing issue, and > look at it purely from an inter-operator perspective, why is it good that > ARIN policy and procedures differentiate between ISPs and End-users? > > Genuinely curious. > > David R Huberman > Principal, Global IP Addressing > Microsoft Corporation > > From: arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net] On > Behalf Of Owen DeLong > Sent: Sunday, December 6, 2015 3:42 PM > To: Jose R. de la Cruz III <jrdelac...@acm.org> > Cc: arin-ppml@arin.net > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Proposal ARIN-2015-8 > > Not speaking for John, but I don’t believe that would help because I believe > that anything which > does not meet the definition of an “end user” is de fact an ISP. > > Creating a clear definition of “ISP” would likely, instead, create a new > category of organizations > which fit neither defined category and suddenly find themselves without any > way to interact with > ARIN. I would not consider that to be an improvement. > > It may be that adding a statement to policy that any organization which does > not meet the strict > definition of “End User” is therefore considered an ISP for policy purposes. > > Owen > > On Dec 6, 2015, at 13:03 , Jose R. de la Cruz III <jrdelac...@acm.org > <mailto:jrdelac...@acm.org>> wrote: > > John: > > Thanks for the additional info. It looks like the problem brought forth in > the referenced document was never completely solved. Because an end user is > defined as "an organization receiving assignments of IP addresses exclusively > for use in its operational networks.", it is my opinion that the > "exclusively" part of the definition maybe the one creating some problems. In > the "large enterprises which may provide services to many entities of various > degrees of affiliation" example, the exclusively part of the definition > should not apply. The question is, are these organizations actively involved > in the reassigning that IP space to their customers? > > Although no formal definition for ISP is included in the policy manual, an > ISP does not fit into the end user definition. Would a definition for ISP > provide a clear guidance in thesubject? How should hosting/cloud/cdn > providers be categorized? > > José > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 8:43 AM, John Curran <jcur...@arin.net > <mailto:jcur...@arin.net>> wrote: > On Dec 4, 2015, at 6:48 AM, Jose R. de la Cruz III <jrdelac...@acm.org > <mailto:jrdelac...@acm.org>> wrote: > > RE: ARIN-2015-8 > > 4. Should End-Users who want to be able to re-assign records simply be > required to become ISPs? > --->No. Why should they? > > 5. Should the ISP/End-User distinction be eliminated (which is a bigger > discussion outside the scope of the current problem statement)? > ---> No. They are different type of business entities and should be serviced > according to their needs. > > I have no comment either way regarding the particular policy proposal under > discussion, but would like to provide some background that may aid in further > consideration of the question: > > - The distinction between “end-user” and “ISP” is very clear in many cases, > but not universally. Examples where it is less clear include university and > college systems, large enterprises which may provide services to many > entities of various degrees of affiliation (wholly-owned, partially-owned, > joint entity, business partner), hosting/cloud/cdn providers (where the line > between infrastructure and customer can be quite blurry at times), etc. > > - The desire to between ISP and End-User (or visa-versa) may be driven > by fee or policy motivations, but we have seen an increase in end-users > who wish to re-assign blocks in order to have more accurate information > in the database regarding the actual address usage, particularly with > respect to their geolocation data. > > Today ARIN tries to work with ISPs and end-users who wish to change > their categorization, but understandly we lack clear guidance for what > is becoming an increasingly blurry distinction. For additional context, > refer to the ARIN 31 Policy Experience Report (where this issue was > raised) - > https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_31/PDF/monday/nobile_policy.pdf > > <https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_31/PDF/monday/nobile_policy.pdf> > > Thanks! > /John > > John Curran > President and CEO > ARIN > > > > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net > <mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net>). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > <http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> > Please contact i...@arin.net <mailto:i...@arin.net> if you experience any > issues.
_______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
