[ppml] Policy Proposal 2002-3: Micro-Assignments for Multihomed Networks
owen at delong.com
Tue Sep 30 11:46:21 EDT 2003
--On Tuesday, September 30, 2003 2:59 PM +0200 Gregory Massel
<gregm at datapro.co.za> wrote:
>> Based on this advice, I will now advocate that we should pass 2002-3
>> without amendment. Further, I will advocate amending 2003-15 to
>> encompass all of ARIN and recommend that it be passed at the next public
>> policy meeting with just that modification. I will vote against any
> Owen, I find it quite amusing the manner in which you advocated the
> change to 2002-3 and dropping of 2003-15 until you found out there would
> be delays.
No... Not only because of the delay. Also, frankly, at this point, these
two proposals will not directly effect me. My actual concern is for people
that are still in positions I have been in. I have all the IP space I need
for quite some time. Further, when I need more for my current position,
it will be quite easy to justify another /20 for it.
> Now you're keen to pass 2002-3 in a manner that doesn't match your
> requirements (you want allocations and assignments) and modify and delay
> 2003-15 to achieve what you want out of an amended 2002-3.
1. Passing 2002-3 will at least make assignments immediately available
to EVERYONE in ARIN. Passing 2003-15 will not help EVERYONE in ARIN,
but will create a subregional exception. I believe this to be a bad
precedent. Even if 2002-3 were not on the table, I would not accept
2003-15 without amendment. Even if I lived in South Africa, I would
still think 2003-15 was a bad idea without amendment. In my opinion,
making sub-regional exceptions, especially based on speculation that
some future body would probably make the same policy, is a bad idea.
2. If there is significant support for delaying and amending 2002-3,
I will go with that. However, given the possibility of getting
real relief for EVERYONE immediately, I feel it might be attractive
to get 2002-3 passed as is.
> Ironically, you think that introducing an unmodified 2002-3 won't
> prejudice a modified 2003-15, yet you claim introducing an unmodified
> 2003-15 would compromise 2002-3??? Why such inconsistency?
3. I did not make any claim about introducing 2003-15 other than to
say I thought it was a good thing that we were seeing more
participation from Africa.
As to passing an unmodified 2003-15, I did not say that it would have
any impact on 2002-3. I said it would be used as an excuse not
to pass an ARIN-wide micro-allocation policy. I still believe that
if 2003-15 passes, it will be used to do just that.
It is relatively easy to argue that 2003-15 serves the area where
large providers don't exist, and, therefore, a micro-allocation
policy isn't needed elsewhere. It's not so easy to argue that
a micro-assignment policy would do the same thing, since as has
been repeatedly defined, assignments don't really help ISPs the
way allocations do. Assignments are really only good for end users.
> Come on, give us a break. You've blatantly displayed to this entire list
> that you have purely your own interests at heart on this issue and that
> you'll happily modify whatever proposals are on the table so long as you
> get what you want with complete disregard to the negative impact that
> might have on the people who originally made the proposals.
This is patently not true. As I stated above. I have all the IP space
I need right now, and, all that I anticipate needing for quite some time.
I recently obtained 3 /20 assignments for the company where I work.
I have plenty of portable swamp space for my house. NOTHING in any of
these policies is about my own personal interest. I think there are
several people who can confirm for you that I do not approach public
policy from a self-interest perspective. It is true that I am passionate
about seeing this problem solved. I _HAVE_ been in positions where
these policies would have helped greatly. I still feel strongly that
these policies are needed, but, they are needed for ALL of ARIN.
> Why don't you propose a complete new policy that sets out to achieve what
> you're looking for instead of hacking apart others that were formulated
> with different intentions in mind?
I was partially involved in some of the early process on 2002-3. I was
also involved in other policies that were rolled into what is now 2002-3.
I have been advocating a micro-assignment/micro-allocation policy since
I became involved in ARIN processes (about the time ARIN was formed).
Proposing a new policy would not be effective. It would get voted down
as a close duplicate of the existing proposals, and, I would be told to
propose amendments instead. As such, I am proposing amendments.
If you look at the history of 2002-3 and it's other predecessors, you will
find that micro-allocations were, indeed, included in at least one of the
policies combined into 2002-3. The AC chose to drop micro-allocations from
the policy after much debate and a lot of back-and-forth.
> In the mean time, lets judge all the existing proposals on their merits
> instead of tearing them apart to achieve unrelated goals.
Per your request:
2002-3 has merit because it provides some relief to all of ARIN region
and takes care of the micro-assignment requirement for everyone in ARIN.
2003-15 has merit, but, does not merit passage because it provides special
status to a sub-region of ARIN and solves a problem which is global to all
of the ARIN region for only a select sub-set of that region. 2003-15 could
merit passage if it were amended to incorporate all of ARIN and not
disenfranchise the majority of the ARIN region.
I don't think we are in as strong a disagreement as you think. I am not
opposed to Africans getting the resources they need. I am not opposed to
African participation in ARIN. I am not opposed to AfriNIC or the AfriNIC
RIR. In fact, I fully support doing whatever we can to expidite AfriNIC
getting to the point where they are their own RIR and can make their own
However, I would think that Africans, of all people, would understand my
desire not to create global policy that grants special status to a
More information about the ARIN-PPML