[ppml] Last Call for Comment: Policy Proposal 2002-6

[Einar Bohlin]

Hi David,

> My reading of the policy proposed would indicate that yes, if you had
> _fully_ used a /16 and had an additional /24, you would be able to request a
> /15.  I am, however, a bit skeptical that full utilization of a /16 such
> that a /24 wouldn't fit is possible.

There's no mention of the justification process in
the policy.  The example is this:

"For example, if an organization relinquished three /24s, they should be allowed to take either a /24, a /23, or a /22 in exchange."

The wording makes it the customer's choice, not ARIN's.
Is that the intention?


> > Used IPs are not as good as fresh ones.
>
> Interesting assertion.  Why do you say this?

We've gotten used IPs from ARIN, and we daily
recycle nets to customers.  There aren't any
problems with IPs when they're brand new.


> > Will there be reduced fees for those used IPs?
>
> Why?

When ARIN allocates a net to an ISP, the expectation
is that the net has not been assigned before.  ARIN
doesn't gaurantee routability, of course; however ARIN 
will know that certain nets have been recycled.  That
knowledge means used IPs should be treated differently.
You don't pay for the nets, you pay for a service... with
recycled nets the overall service is not the same
quality as with new nets.

> > Keep in mind that when this is properly abused many of
> > these requests will have to turn into transfer requests.
>
> What forms of abuse do you anticipate?

If an organization registered nets over the course
of several years, they're not going to be registered
to the same company name; those turn into transfers.

Maybe it's not like a couple years ago when getting
your own routable block was most sought after.
But as far as abuse goes, I was thinking it wouldn't
be too hard to find 9 /24s that weren't even
routed and don't belong to you and return them
for a /20.  You know, maybe with a little more work this
could become a distributed net retrieval system.

> What is the scarcest resource on the Internet these days?

At first I thought you'd meant room for routes.  But 
instead I choose time.  ARIN meetings are few.
Policies are submitted.  There's so little time
to debate them.  People do their best in the time
they have.  It's a beta world.  If this is
released and we learn that it needs modification,
so be it (even the webhosting debacle wasn't that
bad).

Regards,

Einar Bohlin
IP Team
UUNET Technologies, Inc.
Phone: USA 703 886-7362
email: einar.bohlin at wcom.com
(VNET Number 806-7362)


On Wed, 13 Nov 2002, David Conrad wrote:

> Einar,
> 
> As a person responsible for a policy similar to that being discussed at
> ARIN, albeit in a different region, let me provide my 2 cents:
> 
> On 11/12/02 1:05 PM, "Einar Bohlin" <ebohlin at uu.net> wrote:
> > This looks like a blacklisted IP exchange;  kind of like a
> > dirty needle exchange program.
> 
> Not really.  It is an attempt to try to clean up allocations made prior to
> the understanding of the need to aggregate.
> 
> > Does a legacy B and a /24 get you a /15?  And no fees
> > for this? 
> 
> My reading of the policy proposed would indicate that yes, if you had
> _fully_ used a /16 and had an additional /24, you would be able to request a
> /15.  I am, however, a bit skeptical that full utilization of a /16 such
> that a /24 wouldn't fit is possible.
> 
> > Used IPs are not as good as fresh ones.
> 
> Interesting assertion.  Why do you say this?
> 
> > What's
> > ARIN going to do with the used ones?
> 
> Presumably, if enough can be returned, they'll form larger aggregate blocks
> which can then be re-allocated.
> 
> > Will there be reduced fees for those used IPs?
> 
> Why?
> 
> > Keep in mind that when this is properly abused many of
> > these requests will have to turn into transfer requests.
> 
> What forms of abuse do you anticipate?
> 
> > This is to reduce routes? It looks too easily abused, with
> > dubious results.
> 
> What is the scarcest resource on the Internet these days?
> 
> Rgds,
> -drc
> 
>