[arin-discuss] Policy clarification

[IPTelligent SysOp]

Mike,
  
The fees and prerequisites are not the target of the question, but 
whether VPN usage is accepted under ARIN's scrutiny process as "valid 
justification" for issuing an ISP a new (second) address block.
  
The fact is that ISPs (at least in the ARIN area, as in RIPE area looks 
like they are far more open to allowing VPNs as a justifiable use) will 
turn down the customers if they can't preemptively justify the 
allocations, so that the ISP itself hasn't the trouble later when they 
need more addresses and them blam! get denied because they issued, say, 
a /23 or /22 our of their /20 to a downlink customer that uses these 
addresses for VPNs.
  
The political aspect side I mentioned is just adding more spice to the 
discussion, as it may be a catalyst on the decision why or why not 
accepting it as a justifiable reason.
  
Regards,
Rafael

------ Original Message ------
From: "Mike Berger" <berger at shout.net>
To: arin-discuss at arin.net
Sent: 6/25/2010 5:42:12 PM
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Policy clarification
>Political issues aside, how do you justify the request without already 
>having something in place, in which case you probably already have an 
>allocation from your upstream provider? And somebody still has to pay 
>the fees. ARIN doesn't have any special allowance for getting space 
>specifically to circumvent firewalls or security, so you still need 
>the 
>standard justifications, and the reason behind it is just a red 
>herring. 
>
>You also get into a pretty ambiguous area. What you call a "noble 
>attempt" is someone elses subversion. 
>
>On 6/25/10 3:16 PM, IPTelligent SysOp wrote: 
>>Friends, 
>>
>>This may have raised here in the past, but since I couldn't find 
>>anything in a search, I'm bringing it to you here. 
>>
>>What are the accepted justifications (by ARIN) for justified use of a 
>>block assignment? 
>>It raised today on the following WHT thread: 
>>http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=959073 
>>
>>a) Generally, is (end-user) VPN usage sufficient justification under 
>>ARIN's eyes (even if users are inside the region or on the same 
>>country)? If yes, which policies would it fall under? 
>>b) In this specific case, the user wants IP blocks for VPNs that will 
>>circumvent "the Great Firewall of China". I can understand that this 
>>is 
>>a noble attempt in order to make information freely available to 
>>inside 
>>the communist regime of China and void their attempts to block 
>>network 
>>neutrality and freedom of speech; it would be even a humanitary aid 
>>(IMHO) to offer such service to them. But, won't this create a 
>>political issue on government level, or a political issue between 
>>ARIN 
>>and APNIC? What would be the consequences if that was issued? 
>>
>>What's ARIN's exact position on this? 
>>
>>Regards, 
>>Rafael Cresci 
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________ 
>>ARIN-Discuss 
>>You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to 
>>the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net). 
>>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: 
>>http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss 
>>Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues. 
>>    
>
>_______________________________________________ 
>ARIN-Discuss 
>You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to 
>the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net). 
>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: 
>http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss 
>Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.