Single organizations with multi-homed, discrete networks (fwd)

[David R Huberman]

In response, I found I agreed with all of the requirements, but none of
the criteria statements.

to wit:
 
> Criteria for the policy to apply:
> 
> * The organization must have a compelling criteria for creating discrete
> networks. (Examples: regulatory restrictions, geographic diversity, etc)

That's not ARIN's business.

ARIN does not nor should not be involved with organization's business
plans. 

"Why are you designing your network like this?"
"Because we are."

And that's that.

Please do not try and make ARIN into more than what it is! We should not
require ARIN's stamp-of-approval on major design issues.
 
> * Applies only to new and existing ARIN allocations after organization has
> requested this policy to apply to their account.

I don't see why this is necessary to state in a policy. Organizations
either aggregate their address space or they don't. As ARIN hostmasters
consider any given request, the existence or lack thereof of such
aggregation needs to be taken into account.
 
> * Multiple maintainers per organization will not be allowed after
> implementation.

Absolutely disagree. It's my prerogative to use the current policy
framework to the greatest benefit of my company. While in most cases, a
sensible individual can look at a company's numbering goals and state that
using multiple maintainer ID's and ARIN accounts is both inadvisable and
entirely unnecessary, that's not always 100% the case.

The policy framework that exists now mostly works. This whole discussion
is an outgrowth of part of the policy that some of us feels doesn't
work. However, it doesn't preclude completely different circumstances,
completely different implementations, from using the other existing
policies to their organization's benefit.

I guess that's a long-winded way of saying I don't think ARIN should be
outlawing multiple accounts arbitrarily.
 
> Requirements for additional allocations under the policy:
> 
> * Each discrete network must show greater than 80% utilization before
> allocating an additional address block.

Absolutely.
  
> * Network Operators should attempt to provide for CIDR block growth
> paths for networks to reduce number of announcements per diverse
> network.

As worded, absolutely.

> * All allocations and last block granted to the organization must show
> greater than 50% utilization for ARIN to grant an additional address block.

I created a few scenarios for wide-scale geographical aggregation in hopes
of getting the mathematics to work out in support of your statement. In
each case, it did, perfectly. 50% is the logical utilization percentage
for widely-aggregated networks.

/david

*--------------------------------*
| Global Crossing IP Engineering |
| Manager, Global IP Addressing  |
|   TEL: (908) 720-6182          |
|   FAX: (703) 464-0802          |
*--------------------------------*