[ppml] Draft 2 of proposal for ip assignment with sponsorship

Alec H. Peterson ahp at hilander.com
Fri Feb 28 10:17:04 EST 2003

Sigh, my quest to lurk is not going well.  Sorry.

--On Friday, February 28, 2003 9:03 AM -0600 Forrest 
<forrest at almighty.c64.org> wrote:

> So basically what you're saying then is that to "deserve" to be
> multihomed  and be reatchable, you must be a large company/ISP/whatever.
> Screw the  little guy, we didn't need to talk to him anyway.  Where
> exactly do you  draw the line?  Why not take it a step further and just
> filter out  everything longer than an /8 in the old Class A space.  Hey,
> who needs to  hear your /16 announcement out of the block
> anyway.  AT&T has  the entire /8 so you'll still be reachable.  In fact,
> lets just change the  minimum allocation to /8 and then we'll never have
> to worry about routing  table growth ever again.

I really hate it when people put words into my mouth.

I am all for making things as easy as reasonably possible, and the current 
ARIN multi-homing policy I see as quite reasonable.  If you can fully 
utilize a /21, you will be allocated a /20.  Many entities have made use of 
it quite successfully.  Perhaps we should look at modifying that policy 
slightly, perhaps by only requiring people to fully utilize a /22 in order 
to get a /20 (this is just a strawman).

The 'you hate small business' argument is a popular one, because it puts 
whoever you are opposing on very dangerous footing with really no graceful 
way out.  Just so everybody knows, my company is a small company, so 
suggesting that I am somehow against small companies is rather comical.

The fact of the matter is that I pray (even though I'm agnostic) that we 
will never again be in a situation where we _need_ to filter route 
announcements on registry allocation boundaries.  However, putting our 
heads in the sand and just hoping that it will never happen is a great way 
to help it happen again.  I really don't want this discussion to turn into 
an argument.  Our goal here should be to persuade those who are reading but 
not participating to develop an opinion such that they too can help us gain 
concensus one way or another.  There was nothing close to concensus at the 
last public policy meeting, I really hope we can fix that at the next 
meeting, no matter which way it goes.


Alec H. Peterson -- ahp at hilander.com
Chief Technology Officer
Catbird Networks, http://www.catbird.com

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list