From alexk at tugger.net Fri Dec 21 10:49:30 2001 From: alexk at tugger.net (Alex Kamantauskas) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:49:30 -0500 (EST) Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests Message-ID: I have a question about ISP Address Requests. According to the flowchart at it appears that an ISP that is not multi-homed can request addresses from ARIN if they can demonstrate utilization of a /20 and provide reassignment data. However, in the ISP Guidelines for Requesting Initial IP Address Space , only multi-homed organizations are mentioned. Is it still possible for non-multi-homed ISPs to get addresses from ARIN? -- /ak From huberman at gblx.net Fri Dec 21 11:07:23 2001 From: huberman at gblx.net (David R Huberman) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 09:07:23 -0700 (MST) Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > an ISP that is not multi-homed can request addresses from ARIN if they > can demonstrate utilization of a /20 > , only multi-homed > organizations are mentioned. Look under the section entitled, "Requirements for Requesting Initial Address Space" at the URL you note. > Is it still possible for non-multi-homed ISPs to get addresses from ARIN? Absolutely. /david From jb at jbacher.com Fri Dec 21 11:17:30 2001 From: jb at jbacher.com (J Bacher) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:17:30 -0600 Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.2.2.20011221101428.01bef188@localhost> At 09:07 AM 12/21/2001 -0700, David R Huberman wrote: > > an ISP that is not multi-homed can request addresses from ARIN if they > > can demonstrate utilization of a /20 > > > , only multi-homed > > organizations are mentioned. > >Look under the section entitled, "Requirements for Requesting Initial >Address Space" at the URL you note. > > > Is it still possible for non-multi-homed ISPs to get addresses from ARIN? > >Absolutely. > >/david If this is correct, then someone needs to advise the employees at ARIN. I submitted justification for a client requesting a /20 a bit over a week ago and was denied -- not because of insufficient utilitzation -- but because the customer was not yet multi-homed. Oddly enough when I called for policy verification a week prior to the submission I was advised that the customer -was- qualified. At this point, the customer is in limbo. I would appreciate clarification and feedback from ARIN. From alexk at tugger.net Fri Dec 21 11:20:18 2001 From: alexk at tugger.net (Alex Kamantauskas) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:20:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests In-Reply-To: Message-ID: David -- That is what I thought. It might be helpful if the multi-homed policy of only needed to demonstrate utilization of a /21 is mentioned in that section as well, in order to avoid any confusion that might occur. :) On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, David R Huberman wrote: > > > an ISP that is not multi-homed can request addresses from ARIN if they > > can demonstrate utilization of a /20 > > > , only multi-homed > > organizations are mentioned. > > Look under the section entitled, "Requirements for Requesting Initial > Address Space" at the URL you note. > > > Is it still possible for non-multi-homed ISPs to get addresses from ARIN? > > Absolutely. > > /david > -- /ak From aland at rkdcommunications.ab.ca Fri Dec 21 11:27:24 2001 From: aland at rkdcommunications.ab.ca (Alan Dockrill) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 09:27:24 -0700 Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests References: Message-ID: <001601c18a3c$612a7d90$6900a8c0@alan> This message is being forwarded to me by error please check your contact lists. ----- Original Message ----- From: "David R Huberman" To: "Alex Kamantauskas" Cc: Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 9:07 AM Subject: Re: Question about ISP Address Requests > > > an ISP that is not multi-homed can request addresses from ARIN if they > > can demonstrate utilization of a /20 > > > , only multi-homed > > organizations are mentioned. > > Look under the section entitled, "Requirements for Requesting Initial > Address Space" at the URL you note. > > > Is it still possible for non-multi-homed ISPs to get addresses from ARIN? > > Absolutely. > > /david > From aland at rkdcommunications.ab.ca Fri Dec 21 11:28:16 2001 From: aland at rkdcommunications.ab.ca (Alan Dockrill) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 09:28:16 -0700 Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests References: <4.2.2.20011221101428.01bef188@localhost> Message-ID: <003701c18a3c$907c9880$6900a8c0@alan> This message is being forwarded to me by error please check your contact lists. ----- Original Message ----- From: "J Bacher" To: Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 9:17 AM Subject: Re: Question about ISP Address Requests > At 09:07 AM 12/21/2001 -0700, David R Huberman wrote: > > > > an ISP that is not multi-homed can request addresses from ARIN if they > > > can demonstrate utilization of a /20 > > > > > , only multi-homed > > > organizations are mentioned. > > > >Look under the section entitled, "Requirements for Requesting Initial > >Address Space" at the URL you note. > > > > > Is it still possible for non-multi-homed ISPs to get addresses from ARIN? > > > >Absolutely. > > > >/david > > If this is correct, then someone needs to advise the employees at ARIN. I > submitted justification for a client requesting a /20 a bit over a week ago > and was denied -- not because of insufficient utilitzation -- but because > the customer was not yet multi-homed. > > Oddly enough when I called for policy verification a week prior to the > submission I was advised that the customer -was- qualified. > > At this point, the customer is in limbo. I would appreciate clarification > and feedback from ARIN. > From aland at rkdcommunications.ab.ca Fri Dec 21 11:28:21 2001 From: aland at rkdcommunications.ab.ca (Alan Dockrill) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 09:28:21 -0700 Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests References: Message-ID: <003f01c18a3c$b36228b0$6900a8c0@alan> This message is being forwarded to me by error please check your contact lists. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alex Kamantauskas" To: Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 8:49 AM Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests > > I have a question about ISP Address Requests. According to the flowchart > at it appears that > an ISP that is not multi-homed can request addresses from ARIN if they > can demonstrate utilization of a /20 and provide reassignment data. > However, in the ISP Guidelines for Requesting Initial IP Address Space > , only multi-homed > organizations are mentioned. > > Is it still possible for non-multi-homed ISPs to get addresses from ARIN? > > -- > /ak > From ddiller at cogentco.com Fri Dec 21 12:33:17 2001 From: ddiller at cogentco.com (Dave Diller) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:33:17 -0500 Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? Message-ID: <3C23725D.7DADF73C@cogentco.com> I have been advised that "the right people to discuss this with" are on PPML itself, in response to sending the below query to ARIN. Apparently, the people processing IP justifications don't know if it is a valid justification or not, which isn't a good sign. I'm trying to get a handle on it BEFORE a customer comes spouting hearsay that the Policy has in fact passed. So, "right people", has this been voted on yet? > I just read the archives for PPML concerning Policy Proposal 2001-2, > thread located at http://www.arin.net/mailinglists/ppml/0401.html. > There were some interesting comments, but it in no way indicates which > way the final vote went with the Trustees, which is the piece of > information I am interested in. Has this policy been voted on yet? If > not, when will the Board of Trustees vote on it, and where will the > results of that vote be posted? > > Last call for Policy 2001-2 ended at 11:59pm EST 11/23/01. At that > point it was to be forwarded to the ARIN Board of Trustees. There is no > further word. > > I'd REALLY prefer to not give someone a /24 for multihoming and only 20 > documented hosts until I know the Policy allows it. -DaveD From richardj at arin.net Fri Dec 21 13:26:41 2001 From: richardj at arin.net (Richard Jimmerson) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 13:26:41 -0500 Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20011221101428.01bef188@localhost> Message-ID: <001701c18a4d$09aea580$ebfc95c0@cobalt> > > > Is it still possible for non-multi-homed ISPs to get > addresses from ARIN? > > > >Absolutely. > > > >/david > > If this is correct, then someone needs to advise the > employees at ARIN. I > submitted justification for a client requesting a /20 a bit > over a week ago > and was denied -- not because of insufficient utilitzation -- > but because > the customer was not yet multi-homed. > > Oddly enough when I called for policy verification a week > prior to the > submission I was advised that the customer -was- qualified. > > At this point, the customer is in limbo. I would appreciate > clarification > and feedback from ARIN. ARIN reviews requests for IPv4 address space in accordance with the policies that can be found at http://www.arin.net/regserv/initial-isp.html If you feel at any time that a response you receive back from ARIN registration services staff does not properly reflect the stated policies, please contact us and ask to speak to one of the registration analysts or the Director of Registration Services. ARIN's helpdesk can be reached by dialing (703) 227-0660 between the hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM EST, Monday through Friday. Best Regards, Richard Jimmerson Director of Operations American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On > Behalf Of J Bacher > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 11:18 AM > To: ppml at arin.net > Subject: Re: Question about ISP Address Requests > > > At 09:07 AM 12/21/2001 -0700, David R Huberman wrote: > > > > an ISP that is not multi-homed can request addresses > from ARIN if they > > > can demonstrate utilization of a /20 > > > > > , only multi-homed > > > organizations are mentioned. > > > >Look under the section entitled, "Requirements for Requesting Initial > >Address Space" at the URL you note. > > > > > Is it still possible for non-multi-homed ISPs to get > addresses from ARIN? > > > >Absolutely. > > > >/david > > If this is correct, then someone needs to advise the > employees at ARIN. I > submitted justification for a client requesting a /20 a bit > over a week ago > and was denied -- not because of insufficient utilitzation -- > but because > the customer was not yet multi-homed. > > Oddly enough when I called for policy verification a week > prior to the > submission I was advised that the customer -was- qualified. > > At this point, the customer is in limbo. I would appreciate > clarification > and feedback from ARIN. > From richardj at arin.net Fri Dec 21 13:38:21 2001 From: richardj at arin.net (Richard Jimmerson) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 13:38:21 -0500 Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? In-Reply-To: <3C23725D.7DADF73C@cogentco.com> Message-ID: <001801c18a4e$aa87e740$ebfc95c0@cobalt> Hello Dave, Thank you for your inquiry. There was consensus at the ARIN VIII meeting to accept Policy Proposal 2001-2. The ARIN Advisory Council has recommended to the ARIN Board of Trustees that this policy proposal be ratified. The ARIN Board of Trustees will make a final determination on this policy proposal during their January 2002 meeting. We will post new information regarding this policy proposal to the front page of arin.net under the announcements section as soon as it becomes available. Best Regards, Richard Jimmerson Director of Operations American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On > Behalf Of Dave Diller > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 12:33 PM > To: ppml at arin.net > Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > I have been advised that "the right people to discuss this > with" are on > PPML itself, in response to sending the below query to ARIN. > Apparently, the people processing IP justifications don't > know if it is > a valid justification or not, which isn't a good sign. I'm trying to > get a handle on it BEFORE a customer comes spouting hearsay that the > Policy has in fact passed. > > So, "right people", has this been voted on yet? > > > I just read the archives for PPML concerning Policy Proposal 2001-2, > > thread located at http://www.arin.net/mailinglists/ppml/0401.html. > > There were some interesting comments, but it in no way > indicates which > > way the final vote went with the Trustees, which is the piece of > > information I am interested in. Has this policy been voted > on yet? If > > not, when will the Board of Trustees vote on it, and where will the > > results of that vote be posted? > > > > Last call for Policy 2001-2 ended at 11:59pm EST 11/23/01. At that > > point it was to be forwarded to the ARIN Board of Trustees. > There is no > > further word. > > > > I'd REALLY prefer to not give someone a /24 for multihoming > and only 20 > > documented hosts until I know the Policy allows it. > > > -DaveD > From jb at jbacher.com Fri Dec 21 13:45:44 2001 From: jb at jbacher.com (J Bacher) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:45:44 -0600 Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests In-Reply-To: <001701c18a4d$09aea580$ebfc95c0@cobalt> References: <4.2.2.20011221101428.01bef188@localhost> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20011221123504.01be0190@localhost> >ARIN reviews requests for IPv4 address space in accordance with >the policies that can be found at > > http://www.arin.net/regserv/initial-isp.html The multi-homing section defines a required 50% (/21) utilization to obtain a /20. The section preceding multi-homing states: "ARIN allocates IP address prefixes no longer than /20. If allocations smaller than /20 are needed, ISPs should request address space from their upstream provider." Is "needed" defined "must be able to immediately utilize?" The policy that defines IP address allocation for single-homed customers does not have the clarification as the policy for multi-homed customers. I'm asking for that clarification. It doesn't justify my calling ARIN's office until I know which of the two ARIN employees gave me the wrong answer. From huberman at gblx.net Fri Dec 21 14:06:19 2001 From: huberman at gblx.net (David R Huberman) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:06:19 -0700 (MST) Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests In-Reply-To: <4.2.2.20011221123504.01be0190@localhost> Message-ID: > The section preceding multi-homing states: "ARIN allocates IP address > prefixes no longer than /20. If allocations smaller than /20 are > needed, ISPs should request address space from their upstream > provider." Is "needed" defined "must be able to immediately utilize?" Answer for the masses: ---------------------- You're asking the wrong question. Its answer is not relevant to your customer's request. If an organization petitioning ARIN as an ISP demonstrates the efficient utilization of [a /21 as a multi-homed entity][a /20 as a single-homed entity], the organization is entitled to an approval for an initial /20 from ARIN. Don't talk about your intended use of an initial allocation during the request process. It's not ARIN's business, it's not relevant within the policy framework of obtaining IP address registrations, and it will only get you in trouble. Answer for jb: -------------- jb, if it's too late, and you've already explained your customer's IP needs, then the answer is: it depends. o If you've clearly stated you don't need a /20 over the next three months, there are policy considerations ARIN RSG staff can apply when not issuing an approval. It's pithy, but defensible. o If you haven't elaborated on your 3-month needs, then the answer to your question should be no. /david From jmcburnett at msmgmt.com Fri Dec 21 14:11:52 2001 From: jmcburnett at msmgmt.com (McBurnett, Jim) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:11:52 -0500 Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? Message-ID: <750CC28A4CEBD5119AE200508B2C7DDAB1C3@SPAEXCH01> Now here are the questions I have: When and if this does get passed, and I am multihomed to 2 or 3 providers, can they refuse to grant the IP's? what recourse do I have? And how does/should this policy affect what an ISP can charge for a /24? Thanks, Jim -----Original Message----- From: Richard Jimmerson [mailto:richardj at arin.net] Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 1:38 PM To: ddiller at cogentco.com; ppml at arin.net Subject: RE: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? Hello Dave, Thank you for your inquiry. There was consensus at the ARIN VIII meeting to accept Policy Proposal 2001-2. The ARIN Advisory Council has recommended to the ARIN Board of Trustees that this policy proposal be ratified. The ARIN Board of Trustees will make a final determination on this policy proposal during their January 2002 meeting. We will post new information regarding this policy proposal to the front page of arin.net under the announcements section as soon as it becomes available. Best Regards, Richard Jimmerson Director of Operations American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On > Behalf Of Dave Diller > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 12:33 PM > To: ppml at arin.net > Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > I have been advised that "the right people to discuss this > with" are on > PPML itself, in response to sending the below query to ARIN. > Apparently, the people processing IP justifications don't > know if it is > a valid justification or not, which isn't a good sign. I'm trying to > get a handle on it BEFORE a customer comes spouting hearsay that the > Policy has in fact passed. > > So, "right people", has this been voted on yet? > > > I just read the archives for PPML concerning Policy Proposal 2001-2, > > thread located at http://www.arin.net/mailinglists/ppml/0401.html. > > There were some interesting comments, but it in no way > indicates which > > way the final vote went with the Trustees, which is the piece of > > information I am interested in. Has this policy been voted > on yet? If > > not, when will the Board of Trustees vote on it, and where will the > > results of that vote be posted? > > > > Last call for Policy 2001-2 ended at 11:59pm EST 11/23/01. At that > > point it was to be forwarded to the ARIN Board of Trustees. > There is no > > further word. > > > > I'd REALLY prefer to not give someone a /24 for multihoming > and only 20 > > documented hosts until I know the Policy allows it. > > > -DaveD > From jfleming at anet.com Fri Dec 21 14:31:30 2001 From: jfleming at anet.com (Jim Fleming) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 13:31:30 -0600 Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? References: <750CC28A4CEBD5119AE200508B2C7DDAB1C3@SPAEXCH01> Message-ID: <002701c18a56$188870a0$1000a8c0@Unir.com> It all boils down to fairness. Which list do you think is more fair ? The "toy" IPv4 Internet Early Experimentation Allocations ? http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space or The Proof-of-Concept IPv8 Allocations ? http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt Why would people pay for Address Space, when it is FREE ? Jim Fleming http://www.DOT-BIZ.com http://www.in-addr.info 3:219 INFO ----- Original Message ----- From: "McBurnett, Jim" To: "'Richard Jimmerson'" ; ; Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 1:11 PM Subject: RE: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > Now here are the questions I have: > When and if this does get passed, and I am multihomed to 2 or 3 providers, > can they refuse to grant the IP's? what recourse do I have? > > And how does/should this policy affect what an ISP can charge for a /24? > > Thanks, > Jim > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Jimmerson [mailto:richardj at arin.net] > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 1:38 PM > To: ddiller at cogentco.com; ppml at arin.net > Subject: RE: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > Hello Dave, > > Thank you for your inquiry. > > There was consensus at the ARIN VIII meeting to accept > Policy Proposal 2001-2. The ARIN Advisory Council has > recommended to the ARIN Board of Trustees that this > policy proposal be ratified. > > The ARIN Board of Trustees will make a final determination > on this policy proposal during their January 2002 meeting. > > We will post new information regarding this policy proposal > to the front page of arin.net under the announcements section > as soon as it becomes available. > > Best Regards, > > Richard Jimmerson > Director of Operations > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On > > Behalf Of Dave Diller > > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 12:33 PM > > To: ppml at arin.net > > Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > > > > I have been advised that "the right people to discuss this > > with" are on > > PPML itself, in response to sending the below query to ARIN. > > Apparently, the people processing IP justifications don't > > know if it is > > a valid justification or not, which isn't a good sign. I'm trying to > > get a handle on it BEFORE a customer comes spouting hearsay that the > > Policy has in fact passed. > > > > So, "right people", has this been voted on yet? > > > > > I just read the archives for PPML concerning Policy Proposal 2001-2, > > > thread located at http://www.arin.net/mailinglists/ppml/0401.html. > > > There were some interesting comments, but it in no way > > indicates which > > > way the final vote went with the Trustees, which is the piece of > > > information I am interested in. Has this policy been voted > > on yet? If > > > not, when will the Board of Trustees vote on it, and where will the > > > results of that vote be posted? > > > > > > Last call for Policy 2001-2 ended at 11:59pm EST 11/23/01. At that > > > point it was to be forwarded to the ARIN Board of Trustees. > > There is no > > > further word. > > > > > > I'd REALLY prefer to not give someone a /24 for multihoming > > and only 20 > > > documented hosts until I know the Policy allows it. > > > > > > -DaveD > > > From jb at jbacher.com Fri Dec 21 14:25:34 2001 From: jb at jbacher.com (J Bacher) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 13:25:34 -0600 Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests In-Reply-To: References: <4.2.2.20011221123504.01be0190@localhost> Message-ID: <4.2.2.20011221132218.01c6bef0@localhost> > >Answer for the masses: >---------------------- >You're asking the wrong question. Its answer is not relevant to your >customer's request. > >If an organization petitioning ARIN as an ISP demonstrates the efficient >utilization of [a /21 as a multi-homed entity][a /20 as a single-homed >entity], the organization is entitled to an approval for an initial /20 >from ARIN. > >Don't talk about your intended use of an initial allocation during the >request process. It's not ARIN's business, it's not relevant within the >policy framework of obtaining IP address registrations, and it will only >get you in trouble. The answer for the masses is exactly what I was looking for. Not having ever requested a /20 initial for a single-homed customer, I had never been concerned about the language of the policy to even consider questioning it. Thank you. From dgolding at sockeye.com Fri Dec 21 14:28:52 2001 From: dgolding at sockeye.com (Daniel Golding) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:28:52 -0500 Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? In-Reply-To: <750CC28A4CEBD5119AE200508B2C7DDAB1C3@SPAEXCH01> Message-ID: Jim, You have the ultimate enforcement power - you may take your business elsewhere. Seriously, I can imagine why an upstream would refuse to issue the IP space, considering this policy. If they don't, why would you want to do business with them? - Daniel Golding > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On Behalf Of > McBurnett, Jim > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 2:12 PM > To: 'Richard Jimmerson'; ddiller at cogentco.com; ppml at arin.net > Subject: RE: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > Now here are the questions I have: > When and if this does get passed, and I am multihomed to 2 or 3 providers, > can they refuse to grant the IP's? what recourse do I have? > > And how does/should this policy affect what an ISP can charge for a /24? > > Thanks, > Jim > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Jimmerson [mailto:richardj at arin.net] > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 1:38 PM > To: ddiller at cogentco.com; ppml at arin.net > Subject: RE: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > Hello Dave, > > Thank you for your inquiry. > > There was consensus at the ARIN VIII meeting to accept > Policy Proposal 2001-2. The ARIN Advisory Council has > recommended to the ARIN Board of Trustees that this > policy proposal be ratified. > > The ARIN Board of Trustees will make a final determination > on this policy proposal during their January 2002 meeting. > > We will post new information regarding this policy proposal > to the front page of arin.net under the announcements section > as soon as it becomes available. > > Best Regards, > > Richard Jimmerson > Director of Operations > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On > > Behalf Of Dave Diller > > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 12:33 PM > > To: ppml at arin.net > > Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > > > > I have been advised that "the right people to discuss this > > with" are on > > PPML itself, in response to sending the below query to ARIN. > > Apparently, the people processing IP justifications don't > > know if it is > > a valid justification or not, which isn't a good sign. I'm trying to > > get a handle on it BEFORE a customer comes spouting hearsay that the > > Policy has in fact passed. > > > > So, "right people", has this been voted on yet? > > > > > I just read the archives for PPML concerning Policy Proposal 2001-2, > > > thread located at http://www.arin.net/mailinglists/ppml/0401.html. > > > There were some interesting comments, but it in no way > > indicates which > > > way the final vote went with the Trustees, which is the piece of > > > information I am interested in. Has this policy been voted > > on yet? If > > > not, when will the Board of Trustees vote on it, and where will the > > > results of that vote be posted? > > > > > > Last call for Policy 2001-2 ended at 11:59pm EST 11/23/01. At that > > > point it was to be forwarded to the ARIN Board of Trustees. > > There is no > > > further word. > > > > > > I'd REALLY prefer to not give someone a /24 for multihoming > > and only 20 > > > documented hosts until I know the Policy allows it. > > > > > > -DaveD > > > From huberman at gblx.net Fri Dec 21 14:29:42 2001 From: huberman at gblx.net (David R Huberman) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:29:42 -0700 (MST) Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests In-Reply-To: Message-ID: In my response, I glossed over an important concept which, upon further reflection, I should explain more fully. > > The section preceding multi-homing states: "ARIN allocates IP address > > prefixes no longer than /20. If allocations smaller than /20 are > > needed, ISPs should request address space from their upstream > > provider." Is "needed" defined "must be able to immediately utilize?" No. ARIN provides IP address registrations tailored to meet an ISP's three month needs. Three months != immediately. The three month needs part is a very important consideration for both the requestor and the registry. Always keep it mind when making requests for address space, initial or additional. /david From jfleming at anet.com Fri Dec 21 14:54:19 2001 From: jfleming at anet.com (Jim Fleming) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 13:54:19 -0600 Subject: Question about ISP Address Requests References: Message-ID: <000b01c18a59$48917820$1000a8c0@Unir.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David R Huberman" > > No. ARIN provides IP address registrations tailored to meet an ISP's > three month needs. Three months != immediately. > That only applies to Galaxy 0 and StarGate 0 (i.e. G:S=0:0). If you switch your IPv4 traffic to another Galaxy or StarGate then the address space comes from the owner of IN-ADDR.[TLD]. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/unir.txt You can switch using RIFRAF Routing. This may help... http://www.dot-biz.com/IPv4/Tutorial/ http://www.RepliGate.net The Netfilter Project: Packet Mangling for Linux 2.4 http://netfilter.samba.org Jim Fleming http://www.IPv8.info IPv16....One Better !! From huberman at gblx.net Fri Dec 21 14:41:45 2001 From: huberman at gblx.net (David R Huberman) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 12:41:45 -0700 (MST) Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? In-Reply-To: <750CC28A4CEBD5119AE200508B2C7DDAB1C3@SPAEXCH01> Message-ID: Hello Jim, > When and if this does get passed, and I am multihomed to 2 or 3 providers, > can they refuse to grant the IP's? what recourse do I have? Yes, any organization can refuse to provide services to a customer. Recourse? If you really want to do business with them, ask them to reconsider by providing them proof that ARIN's policy allows them to do this. > And how does/should this policy affect what an ISP can charge for a /24? It doesn't. ARIN's policies in no way directly address the business relationship between an organization, its customer, and fees transacted between the two. My organization charges a nominal fee, under the guise of "cost recovery"/administrative cost. Other ISPs dont charge anything. But ARIN policy decisions, and specifically, 2001-2, have no bearing on the issue, as I see it. /david From dgolding at sockeye.com Fri Dec 21 14:53:48 2001 From: dgolding at sockeye.com (Daniel Golding) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 14:53:48 -0500 Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: There was a typo in this message that changes it's meaning. It should say... /s/can/can't Sorry... > Jim, > > You have the ultimate enforcement power - you may take your > business elsewhere. Seriously, I can't imagine why an upstream > would refuse to issue the IP space, considering this policy. If > they don't, why would you want to do business with them? > > - Daniel Golding > -----Original Message----- > From: Daniel Golding [mailto:dgolding at sockeye.com] > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 2:29 PM > To: McBurnett, Jim; 'Richard Jimmerson'; ddiller at cogentco.com; > ppml at arin.net > Subject: RE: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > Jim, > > You have the ultimate enforcement power - you may take your > business elsewhere. Seriously, I can imagine why an upstream > would refuse to issue the IP space, considering this policy. If > they don't, why would you want to do business with them? > > - Daniel Golding > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On Behalf Of > > McBurnett, Jim > > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 2:12 PM > > To: 'Richard Jimmerson'; ddiller at cogentco.com; ppml at arin.net > > Subject: RE: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > > > > Now here are the questions I have: > > When and if this does get passed, and I am multihomed to 2 or 3 > providers, > > can they refuse to grant the IP's? what recourse do I have? > > > > And how does/should this policy affect what an ISP can charge for a /24? > > > > Thanks, > > Jim > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Richard Jimmerson [mailto:richardj at arin.net] > > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 1:38 PM > > To: ddiller at cogentco.com; ppml at arin.net > > Subject: RE: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > > > > Hello Dave, > > > > Thank you for your inquiry. > > > > There was consensus at the ARIN VIII meeting to accept > > Policy Proposal 2001-2. The ARIN Advisory Council has > > recommended to the ARIN Board of Trustees that this > > policy proposal be ratified. > > > > The ARIN Board of Trustees will make a final determination > > on this policy proposal during their January 2002 meeting. > > > > We will post new information regarding this policy proposal > > to the front page of arin.net under the announcements section > > as soon as it becomes available. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Richard Jimmerson > > Director of Operations > > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On > > > Behalf Of Dave Diller > > > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 12:33 PM > > > To: ppml at arin.net > > > Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? > > > > > > > > > I have been advised that "the right people to discuss this > > > with" are on > > > PPML itself, in response to sending the below query to ARIN. > > > Apparently, the people processing IP justifications don't > > > know if it is > > > a valid justification or not, which isn't a good sign. I'm trying to > > > get a handle on it BEFORE a customer comes spouting hearsay that the > > > Policy has in fact passed. > > > > > > So, "right people", has this been voted on yet? > > > > > > > I just read the archives for PPML concerning Policy Proposal 2001-2, > > > > thread located at http://www.arin.net/mailinglists/ppml/0401.html. > > > > There were some interesting comments, but it in no way > > > indicates which > > > > way the final vote went with the Trustees, which is the piece of > > > > information I am interested in. Has this policy been voted > > > on yet? If > > > > not, when will the Board of Trustees vote on it, and where will the > > > > results of that vote be posted? > > > > > > > > Last call for Policy 2001-2 ended at 11:59pm EST 11/23/01. At that > > > > point it was to be forwarded to the ARIN Board of Trustees. > > > There is no > > > > further word. > > > > > > > > I'd REALLY prefer to not give someone a /24 for multihoming > > > and only 20 > > > > documented hosts until I know the Policy allows it. > > > > > > > > > -DaveD > > > > > From ddiller at cogentco.com Fri Dec 21 15:37:57 2001 From: ddiller at cogentco.com (Dave Diller) Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 15:37:57 -0500 Subject: Status of Policy Proposal 2001-2? References: <750CC28A4CEBD5119AE200508B2C7DDAB1C3@SPAEXCH01> Message-ID: <3C239DA5.93C4A1B4@cogentco.com> "McBurnett, Jim" wrote: > > Now here are the questions I have: > When and if this does get passed, and I am multihomed to 2 or 3 providers, > can they refuse to grant the IP's? what recourse do I have? > The point of this is to allow you to have ONE /24 from ONE provider, and the others would then accept it (as usual) via BGP. The intent is NOT for someone to get multiple /24s for their 20 hosts. Assuming you are currently multihomed, you should have no need to even ASK for another one under the guise of multihoming. Normal host justification procedures apply. Given that caveat, then yes, an ISP could very well refuse to grant you a /24 when you've already asked them to accept the one you've already received from Provider B. Fortunately for you, there would be no real reason for an ISP to refuse the first request once it is "legal", short of an ignorance of the new policy. The entire reason for refusal has traditionally hinged on "it is an unsupported form of acceptable justification" to ARIN. If/when that goes away, there would be an ARIN URL that you could send to your ISP, pointing out the policy. But until that URL is there, no dice. -DaveD From memsvcs at arin.net Fri Dec 28 14:42:14 2001 From: memsvcs at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 14:42:14 -0500 (EST) Subject: December ARIN Today Now Posted Message-ID: The December issue of ARIN's quarterly newsletter is now available online at: http://www.arin.net/members/2001_Dec_newsletter.pdf Included in this issue: Overview of ARIN VIII meeting Election results Upcoming industry meeting calendar Recap of fall industry meetings FAQ's from Registration Services Dept. Link to new training flowcharts ARIN department updates Articles from the community are welcome as well as suggestions for content in future editions. Please send your comments regarding the newsletter to arintoday at arin.net. Regards, Susan Hamlin Director, Member Services