[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 114: RFC1918 as initial ISP multihomed criteria

George, Wes E IV [NTK] Wesley.E.George at sprint.com
Fri May 7 15:05:34 EDT 2010

I oppose this proposal.

I think this is probably a legitimate issue, but given that it seems to refer primarily to IPv4 space...well...
The last couple of proposals dealt with how to manage the last /8 of IPv4 space. At its fastest, we're talking about 6-12 months before this policy could make its way through the PDP and be adopted.
Have you ever heard the phrase "rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic"?

There's simply not enough IPv4 space left to be seriously considering making the means to qualify for it more permissive, however noble the goals of ridding the world of NATs and cutting down on renumbering may be. The reality is that it's going to get worse before it gets better, because when we start running out, people are going to choose NATs as a way to stretch the IPv4 space they do have. I'd be willing to bet that the same networks that don't have the resources to renumber twice and are just now becoming multihomed also won't have the resources to get PI IP space on the transfer market, so unless they get lucky on the waiting list (if that gets adopted), chances are quite likely that at best, networks so situated will end up renumbering either just once (into PA space, because there won't be any PI to be had) or not at all.

If this is still a problem in terms of a network's ability to qualify for IPv6 addresses (and I'm not convinced that it is), it might make sense to modify this proposal to update NRPM section 6 (taking into account other proposals like 2010-4 that are already in progress), so that those unfortunate networks in this position are not hamstrung on the IPv6 side.


-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Member Services
Sent: Friday, May 07, 2010 12:28 PM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 114: RFC1918 as initial ISP multihomed criteria

ARIN received the following policy proposal and is posting it to the
Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) in accordance with Policy Development

Policy Proposal 114: RFC1918 as initial ISP multihomed criteria

Proposal Originator: Steve Bertrand

Proposal Version: 1

Date: 7 May 2010

Proposal type: Modify

Policy term: Permanent

Policy statement:

Append the following statement to the end of all three criteria under

", or the equivalent number of addresses within RFC 1918 space."


There are times when I've come across an ISP network in which either
their, or one of their ISP clients access networks will fit the
requirements based on addresses, but they utilize RFC 1918 space with
numerous layers of NAT, with only a very small block of public address
space from their upstream(s).

In that case, to qualify under the multi-homed policy, the ISP (and/or
its clients) would first have to renumber out of the private space into
an upstream space, and then renumber again after receiving the
allocation from ARIN.

This brief amendment would alleviate the double renumbering, and
conserve the human resources required by all parties involved.

Although I've considered ideas on how the use of RFC 1918 space could be
justified to ARIN, I feel that this could be hashed out on the list if
the intent of the proposal is accepted by the community.

Timetable for implementation: immediate

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

This e-mail may contain Sprint Nextel Company proprietary information intended for the sole use of the recipient(s). Any use by others is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies of the message.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list