[ppml] ARIN Policy Proposal 2002-9

[Beran]

I think this Policy Proposal is a great one and would like to see it passed
at the end of the month.

Trevor Paquette wrote:

>Isn't this virtually the same thing as 2002-3???
>
>(The difference is that 2002-9 does not require multi-homing).

Well you answered your own questions. It is NOT the same as 2002-3 because
it does NOT require mulit-homing.

>*** Again I ask.. ARIN moved away from giving /24s to
>*** individual companies years ago, and decided to let
>*** the upstream ISPs handle it. There must have been
>*** a reason for this. Does anyone know why? Were the
>*** reasons recorded?

I do not know the reasons for this. However I do know that many of these
ISPs are:
1) difficult to deal with
2) Merging, going out of business, etc.
3) Changing policy's often
4) Charging for IP numbers at high prices which now has become a trend
5) The only companies they do charge this to are companies that don't
qualify for /20 address space... sticking it to the little guy!

>I'd hate to see this motion pass, only to repeat
>history again and move back to where we are now.

I disagree completely. I'd like to see this motion pass. Share the /24
responsibility with the ISP's. It will add some work for ARIN but it will
also provide better control and will likely result in many /20 trade-ins. It
will also help keep prices in check for ip address space below /20 sizes
when customers have a choice.

>As for people complaining about their ISP charging for
>IP space; either:
>1) Find a different ISP (Capitalism at it's finest..)
>2) Use it as a bargaining tool to get your monthly
>fees reduced. (I'm paying $X a month in IP fees..
>I want my monthly fees reduced by $X as well. EVERYTHING is negotiable.)

Well, It's an overall trend. The ISP's know that companies are stuck and
cannot qualify for a /20 so they end up taking advantage of this.
Geographic location often has an impact of availability of providers. Also
trying to negotiate with a provider when you are a small company is not as
easy as a larger business opportunity where you have the ability to go and
register your own /20. The smaller ISP's are often held hostage by the
bigger ones asking for a per $ per month for any IP given to their
customers.

Just my .02


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net]On Behalf Of
> Member Services
> Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 7:20 AM
> To: arin-announce at arin.net; ppml at arin.net
> Subject: [ppml] ARIN Policy Proposal 2002-9
>
>
>
> A copy of a message sent to the ARIN public policy mailing list
> on September 30, 2002, is provided at the bottom of this message.
> The author intended this message to become a new policy proposal.
>
> ARIN welcomes feedback and discussion about the following policy
> proposal in the weeks leading to the ARIN Public Policy Meeting
> in Eugene, Oregon, scheduled for October 30-31, 2002. All feedback
> received on the mailing list about this policy proposal will be
> included in the discussions that will take place at the upcoming
> Public Policy Meeting.
>
> This policy proposal discussion will take place on the ARIN Public
> Policy Mailing List (ppml at arin.net).  Subscription information is
> available at http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/index.html
>
> Richard Jimmerson
> Director of Operations
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>
> ### * ###
>
> Policy Proposal 2002-9: To Allow Micro-Assignments for End-user
> Organizations
>
> Specific language to be adopted:
> Keep all the current IPV4 End-user Assignments language
> except to change
> in third paragraph change /20 to /24:
> The new paragraph will read:
> The minimum block of IP address space assigned by ARIN is a /24. If
> assignments smaller than /24 are needed, end-users should
> contact their
> upstream provider.
>
> Arguments for the Proposal and General Discussion of the Issue:
> I started a company in 1991 and was able to obtain a Class C license.
> Our company did well and grew to more than a hundred
> employees. I left the
> company last year and started a new company. My old company still has
> the class C that I registered. (/24)
> My new company is growing but does not support the use of a
> /20 address
> space. My ISP is charging me for every ip address I use. I never paid
> for ip address in the past and do not feel good about it now.
> We should have a policy in place that supports small
> businesses and does
> not promote ripping off the small business's by the letting the large
> ISP's charge for each IP used.
>
> Proposed Timetable for Implementation:
> To be voted October 30th for immediate implementation.
>
> ## END ##
>
>
>
>