Things that need to be addressed

John wrote:
>> I think that we need to go back to the basics (which were
>> in the first few posts) and define the scope of the problem
>> that we are trying to resolve

I agree, that is why in my email I added two items to the list of issues.

1) Address allocation and reclamation
2) Filter companies policies and practices can block a single IP address
taking out thousands of unrelated hosts that are using virtual ip-less
addressing.

 -- So what is the problem we are trying to solve?
Simply stated, we are exhausting our supply of IP addresses, what can we do
to reduce the number and demand for IP addresses from hosting companies.

 -- What is the premise?
It is recognized that with current technology for both web hosts and email
hosting companies, it is possible to host multiple domains without requiring
a unique IP address for each domain.

 -- What is our goal?
Develop a policy that for hosting companies applying for IP address
allocation.

 -- When do we have to have it completed?
By the spring meeting of ARIN which I think is April. If we set our own goal
for Jan 31, 2001, we should have plenty of time to circulate and review the
proposed policy.

We need to ask ourselves, why do we need a policy for IP address assignment
with hosting companies? Well it is because we are short IP addresses. So the
reason for considering a policy for hosts is because we are short IP
Addresses.

Part of any brainstorming is to consider _all_ ideas and get them listed.
Then shoot them down after we have developed a list of possible ideas. I
thought we were at the brainstorm phase, not the shoot down phase. In fact
Alex wrote in his first post, and I am paraphrasing, "what other issues
should we add?"

I posted an idea and instead of adding it to a brainstorm list, we head off
in another tangent about specious logic. Since I posted my idea, others have
said to this list that address reclamation is beyond our abilities in our
group and it being worked on by other groups. I can accept that. But it is
still fair to list it as it can solve the address problem.

Lets move forward and during the next two weeks, lets just get ideas and
issues out on the table and lets not spend time shooting each new idea as
they are posted.

 -- Who wants to be the keeper of the list?

The first list I saw had four. I have added two.

What others ideas and issues do folks have?

 - Steve

Steve Pierce, HDL
Direct: (734) 482-9682
mailto:Steve at HDL.com | http://HDL.com



-----Original Message-----
From: Sweeting, John [mailto:John.Sweeting at cwusa.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 6:36 PM
To: 'Steve Pierce'; ARIN List
Subject: RE: Things that need to be addressed


I think that we need to go back to the basics (which were in the first few
posts) and define the scope of the problem that we are trying to resolve
with this policy. I believe Alec's point was that in order to have an
effective policy it must be created to solve a specific issue and not try to
solve all issues with one policy. Policies are usually made to either change
or modify the behavior of certain individuals (or companies) and with that
in mind, policy makers must try their best to be fair to the greatest number
of individuals (or companies)with the least amount of disruption possible.
So with that in mind we should determine the following:

1. What is the exact problem that needs to be fixed?
2. What is the best way to solve that problem?
3. What are the issues that would prevent us from setting a policy based on
the best solution? and how do we deal with those issues?

There are several ways to deal with the issues, they can be accounted for in
the policy if they are within the scope of the actual problem, they can be
ignored as out of scope, they can be addressed with the individuals (or
companies) that find them to be issues etc.....

BTW, I agree that ARIN cannot (and to the best of my knowledge has not) base
it's policy on the actions of others but rather on the scope of the problem
that the members have determined requires fixing.