[ppml] ppml 2002-7

McBurnett, Jim jmcburnett at msmgmt.com
Fri Feb 14 19:34:20 EST 2003

First, I do like the way this sounds. BUT, I have some concerns. 
see inline..
> What do you think about doing this different then what is in 
> 2002-7 and 
> instead of lowering minimimum allocation/assignment and 
> having company 
> become new full member, doing this with special policy and special 
> associate membership. We can do it so that to get this 
> membership company 
> would need to have two ARIN full members sponsor it (i.e. its two 
> upstreams) 
It took me nearly a month to get the right people at one provider
to agree they would multi-home. How long would it take to get 2 
providers to agree to this. I am sure we have some IP Admin's from large 
ISP's on here.. COMMENTS??

>   1. ARIN is not put in the position of having to verify multihoming,
>   having two sponsors makes sure of that.
Have you ever filled out an ASN request? If no, take a look at the form.
You have to have two peer ASNs to properly mult-home. Sure an upstream may let 
send them a private, but......

>   2. Presumably existing arin members would filter out some 
> companies that 
>   really do not need this separate ip block and make sure and 
> make sure 
>   that some technical requirements exist for the assignment. 
yea, and are these the same folks that should make sure X user does not
get 128 IP addresses to host 38 domain webpages?

>   3. It is still possible for company that got this 
> associative membership 
>   to move to another isp and keep the ip block, but they 
> would need to 
>   make sure their new isp is willing to sponsor them. 
This could fall back to the same kinds of diffuculty.
The policy would only work if ALL ISP's played well togather...

>   4. ARIN has records on who sponsors are and in case of 
> billing problems 
>   or if it receives reports that address or some other whois 
> info is not 
>   kept up to date, it can ask for assistance of their 
> sponsors to get in 
>   touch with right people. 
This is really good. If I don't know how to contact a customer I
send a bill to every month, boy would that be dumb..
Just as long as the ISP plays well.. You might learn a little about
pain in the rear ISPs on the SPAM-L list... ISPs that are a haven for
SPAMMERS, careless about blacklists, so they may care even less on 
Bottom line is: UNTIL ARIN gets some real abilities to slap 
penalties of some kind on ISPs and end users, a lot of people 
won't care..

> I do realize this would be kind of compromise and it would 
> not be as easy 
> to get small ip block as some would like but on the other 
> hand I believe 
> some of the current proponents (like large ISPs who are worried about 
> loosing control of ip assignments) may support this and it might be 
> good as compromise between different positions.
> Please comment on above and if you think this is a good idea, 
> I'll write 
> up official proposal.

Overall, I like this..especially #4..
Don't take me as overly critical, I am just trying to cover every base..
And no I am not that rententive, just to much time justifing all I do...


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list