[ppml] 4.4.2 Micro-allocations for anycast services

[Mark Jeftovic]

Re: http://arin.net/policy/proposals/2006_5.html

The ammendment to allow micro-allocations for anycast services has come
to my attention and I wanted to take a moment to comment on this and
express support for this proposal.

As a commercial DNS provider, anycast presents a viable method to
increase robustness which adds to net stability. At present, the minimum
allocation requirements pose an obstacle to smaller to medium DNS
providers who want to test and deploy anycast services.

DNS providers are increasingly the targets of DDoS attacks. Making
anycast deployment more accessible to small-to-medium sized DNS
providers enhances net stability in two ways:

	1) it provides the chance for targetted providers to better 		 
withstand attacks at the time they occur.

	2) it allows for additional analysis of attack traffic which 			can 
then be used in conjunction with previously collected data 			to 
eventually identify and take down the antagonists.

Micro-allocations would promote more widespread use of anycast based DNS
services and it would not be unrealistic to posit that it would set the
stage where larger portions of the 2nd and 3rd level namespace enjoy the
same kind redundancy we've become accustomed to at the root.

With respect to the specifics of the proposal, I wonder out loud if
limiting the test-bed to 16 allocations over 2 years would lead to a
type of "landrush" in micro-allocations which may foster the very
situation ARIN is attempting to mitigate: unwarranted allocations.

If the test-bed cap is limited to 16, interested parties may apply for
the allocation despite not being near ready to deploy, simply to have
the option to do so at a later date and being fearful of being
"locked-out" of the test bed and having to wait 2 years or more for
another shot.

My recommendation would be to allow the micro-allocations without limit.
Would it be possible to require the assignee to demonstrate appropriate
use of the address space within a certain timeframe? A "use-it-or-lose
it" approach?

In any case, I do hope this is adopted.

Sincerely,

- mark

---
Mark Jeftovic <markjr at easydns.com>
Founder & President, easyDNS Technologies Inc.
ph. +1-(416)-535-8672 ext 225
fx. +1-(866) 273-2892