[ppml] New ARIN Sub-region Policy Proposal (Rural-America)
john at chagres.net
Tue Oct 7 13:21:48 EDT 2003
> >3. Utilization Reporting and Justification. All other
> >ARIN policies reguarding the reporting of justification information
> >for the allocation of IPv4 address space will remain
> >in effect.
> Totally unneccesary verbage. A policy proposal
> onle ever changes the parts of policy that it changes.
> There is no need to say that the rest of the
> policies will be unchanged.
Same language as whats in the current Africa policy...
> >4. IPv6 considerations: Rural America providers are eager
> >to start testing and deploying IPv6 networks. Rural America
> >operators have the ability to deploy IPv6 quicker than larger
> >providers. Therefor, providers that receive IPv4 space
> >under this policy shall also be permitted to request and
> >receive a single /48 of IPv6 space. This will help enable
> >rural providers and move them forward with IPv6 technology.
> >Further allocations will be handled under current IPv6 policy.
> This is a radical change to the IPv6 policy and should
> really be discussed on its own. This is the equivalent
> of saying that rural ISPs should get a single /32 allocation
> of IPv4 addresses which is ludicrous. If there is some
> reason why this class of ISP cannot justify an IPv6 /32
> then we should work on changing that aspect of the
> IPv6 policy.
Simple reason. Rural America Providers can't get ARIN IPv4
space today, thus they can't get IPv6 either. Rural America
providers wish to deploy and start testing IPv6. Their
upstreams do not provide such address space.
You can not get IPv6 space from
Yet many of these providers have space from ARIN..
> >5. Pricing. The ARIN BOT will review and evaluate the pricing
> >for these allocations, taking into strong consideration the
> >economic conditions of Rural America providers. The suggested
> >"cost" for these allocations will be $1250 USD per year.
> This item is not a policy change; it is a request
> for the BoT to review and act. It doesn't belong
> in a policy proposal and may, indeed, have merit
> on its own as an item of business at an ARIN meeting
> outside of the policy process.
Rural providers are damaged because of the current Pricing
Policies that ARIN has. They are underrepresented.
> --Michael Dillon
More information about the ARIN-PPML