[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-139 No reassignment without network service
khelms at zcorum.com
Fri Apr 8 15:18:46 EDT 2011
> I'll humbly say that you are not correct. I have worked with many ISPs and consulted for many organizations
> to help them through the ARIN process and to obtain address space under ARIN policies.
> The policy that allowed a /20 has been changed and the boundary is much lower (/24). If they are not
> multi-homed, then, you are correct, the bar is still set at /20 (still a relatively low threshold for an
> ISP to meet). I would support policy to move that bar closer to /24 (possibly even all the way to /24).
> Since you're providing services to these guys, what's the meaningful difference between giving them
> a block after collecting all the justification from them, vs. helping them put the justification together
> and sending it to ARIN so they can get their own block?
If the bar is moved down to a /24 for single homed ISPs then much of the
need for what we've provided goes away, provided there are blocks
available. Having said that I don't see a lot of ISPs being eager to go
through the paperwork hassle for an IPv4 disbursement they believe won't
happen. If it can be demonstrated that IPs are in fact available for
ISPs then this would be mitigated some, but there is still the issue
that neither ARIN nor anyone else can guarantee a block will be there
when an ISP needs one.
> Under the existing policy, staff could be forced to issue addresses to such operations based on
> a relatively thin facade. This change would close that loophole and brings the policy in line
> with current staff practice.
We've been completely clear with ARIN about what we do and where the IPs
are going and we've never had an issue getting additional space. That
leaves me questioning whether "current staff practice" is consistently
what you believe it to be. I checked my records and we've gotten blocks
every year or every other year since 2003 with our most recent on being
10/15/2010. Also, its trivial to become a "connected provider" via a
tunnel so this change really isn't much of an impediment to the kind of
problem you're trying to fix.
More information about the ARIN-PPML