Single organizations with multi-homed, discrete networks

[Sweeting, John]

I totally agree, point in case: If an ISP is going into an aggressive
buildout of its infrastructure that is projected and budgeted over a 2 year
period then it would make sense to assign a block of address space to that
ISP that would cover the project. You may not give them all the address
space at one time but at least you could reserve a block that would cover
their network expansion plans and then dole it out IAW with their plan as
long as they follow it and can provide the details required to justify
releasing more of the reserved block. All during this time they will still
need to provide address space to customers and it would make sense that this
address space come from seperate block of address space. This is especially
true for large, global networks but is also a concern with regional
networks. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tanya Hinman [mailto:thinman at clp.cw.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 12:03 PM
To: ppml at arin.net
Subject: RE: Single organizations with multi-homed, discrete networks


Richard,


>Should ARIN make a change to its policy that takes this issue
>into consideration and prevents organizations from having to
>open multiple maintainer accounts to meet the IP addressing
>needs of their multi-homed, discrete networks?


Yes, ARIN should make a change to its policy. This would give ISP's the
ability to plan for each network appropriately. I also think this should be
the case for Internal and Customer IP Address requests. Currently if you do
not have 80% of your customer space utilized then you cannot obtain more
address space for internal and backbone addressing without opening another
maintainer account. Allowing these requests to be considered separate but
billing under the same maintainer would also be a way that ARIN can cut the
amount of income coming in from the membership, which was also discussed at
the meeting.

Tanya



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On Behalf Of
Richard Jimmerson
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 8:17 AM
To: ppml at arin.net
Subject: Single organizations with multi-homed, discrete networks


During the open microphone session at the ARIN public policy
meeting last month the issue of single organizations with
multi-homed, discrete networks was raised.

When these organizations receive an allocation from ARIN, they
split it up and assign a minimum of a /20 to each multi-homed,
discrete network.  There is a concern that a longer prefix
would be filtered.  Although this satisfies their concerns about
filtering, it often conflicts with ARIN's policy for requesting
additional IP address space.  ARIN's policy states an organization
must demonstrate 80% of their previous allocation is efficiently
utilized before their request for additional IP address space will
be reviewed.

Apply the following scenario:  An ISP receives a /18 from ARIN and
splits it up into four /20s -- one for each of their multi-homed,
discrete networks.  After some time, one of those networks may
have utilized 75% of its /20, but the others may be growing at a
slower rate and only be at 25% each.  The network that is at 75%
would soon need additional IP address space, but the overall
utilization of the /18 obtained from ARIN would only be at 37.5%.
This would prevent that organization from meeting the criteria
for obtaining additional IP address space from ARIN.

Knowing this to be the case, the ISP may elect to justify a
separate maintainer account with ARIN for that single multi-
homed, discrete network.  This eliminates any consideration
of the growth rate of the other networks when applying for
additional IP address space.  If an ISP was to do this for
other networks they would soon have many maintainer accounts
open with ARIN.

Should ARIN make a change to its policy that takes this issue
into consideration and prevents organizations from having to
open multiple maintainer accounts to meet the IP addressing
needs of their multi-homed, discrete networks?

This question is posed as a continuation of the discussion
that took place at the recent public policy meeting.  Your
feedback is requested.

Richard Jimmerson
Director of Operations
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)