[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-6: Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors - Revised

[Bill Darte]

Not to speak for John, but I believe the plurality issue only applies to
how the new request would be allocated.
bd


On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at> wrote:

> John, a few clarifying scenarios below, if you would be so kind as to
> apply your interpretation both pre- and post-policy to these as well:
>
> On 10/8/2013 6:15 PM, John Curran wrote:
>
>> On Oct 8, 2013, at 9:26 AM, Frank Bulk <frnkblk at iname.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  John,
>>>
>>> What if Acme Hosting, Inc., located in the Silicon Valley, found a niche
>>> offering virtualized servers for Asian customers who want to have their
>>> Internet-based services hosted more closely to the North American market.
>>>
>>> Acme Hosting and their infrastructure are clearly in the U.S., but their
>>> customers are not in the ARIN region.
>>>
>> Their physical infrastructure would only qualify for modest address space
>> in accordance with policy, and this would not change with the addition of
>> virtualized servers on existing equipment.
>>
>>  Does the policy, as currently written, preclude Acme Hosting from
>>> requesting
>>> more address space as their Asian customer base grows?
>>>
>> Under current policy, they may request additional addresses as their
>> customers
>> grow.  Under the current revised policy text, we would not consider their
>> customers who are not in region.  This side effect (hosting companies not
>> being
>> able to consider customers who are out of region) may or may not be
>> desirable,
>> but is understandable given the additional of customer region as criteria.
>>
>
>
> So if I understand the above response, when Acme Hosting comes and
> requests more addresses for the VMs because they have a bunch more Asian
> customers who want a local server presence, you would approve now but deny
> with the new policy. Correct?
>
> And when Acme Hosting, who was doing a brisk business selling VMs to Asian
> customers, and now has 55% Asian customers in total comes to you to request
> a  bunch of IP addresses for VMs that they are selling to a new set of *US
> based* customers, you would still approve now but deny (because of the
> plurality of existing usage) under the new policy?
>
> Does the same apply for Acme Websites, who was doing a similarly brisk
> business with the Asian market, but not for VMs but instead additional IP
> addresses on physical hosts used for non-SNI SSL hosting? Or are their
> additional IP addresses that they're assigning to physical hardware
> interfaces considered by ARIN to be "infrastructure" owned and operated by
> Acme Websites? (They do respond to ARP requests on the physical Ethernet
> segment, so it sure feels like they're "really there")
>
> How about for Acme Physical Servers, who was also doing a similarly brisk
> business with the Asian market, but instead of VMs, was out provisioning
> actual physical hardware for these customers? Are those physical servers
> which are in use by the Asian customers considered to be customer equipment
> owned and operated by Asian customers, or infrastructure equipment owned by
> Acme Physical Servers (who not only has physical possession of the servers,
> but also the root password and only lets the customers upload website data)?
>
> And what do you do when the above Acme Physical Servers gets approved for
> the space, but realizes they can save a bunch of money selling all their
> cloud servers on eBay and moving everyone to 1/10th of the remaining
> machines as VMs?
>
> I'm sure I'll have a small number of additional questions after learning
> the response for each of these, but this should give us enough to think
> about.
>
> Matthew Kaufman
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at 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 info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20131008/8808a2ba/attachment.htm>