[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-155 IPv4 Number Resources for Use Within Region
alh-ietf at tndh.net
Wed Jul 6 22:36:10 EDT 2011
Jimmy Hess wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Tony Hain <alh-ietf at tndh.net> wrote:
> > Robert E. Seastrom wrote:
> >> William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> writes:
> >> > Oppose as written.
> >> I wrote this proposal as a starting point, and expected plenty of
> >> spirited discussion surrounding it. Didn't expect that it would be
> >> quite so overwhelmingly "oppose", but those are the breaks.
> Oppose as written... means just that.. I am strongly in favor of the
> concept, but see overwhelming issues with the current text or criteria
> of the proposal, and they can be fixed by revising the proposal.
> Realistically, it is wasteful for a global organization to have to deal
> with every RIR and prove every single address is being used in the
> region that allocated it. And this results in inefficient usage of IP
> address space, since now multiple allocations would be required
> from multiple RIRs, for such orgs,
> There must be a way to eliminate the abuse cases without throwing
> out the common behavior, of multi-nationals having networks that
> cross national borders and utilize ARIN IPs for some networks outside
> our region.
> Instead ARIN should set reasonable restrictions and limits to
> prevent or minimize RIR shopping, or obtaining resource allocations
> from ARIN with an intention of using a majority of the resources in
> networks outside the geographic region the resources are assigned to.
> With the policy objective of limiting abuse; or "finding an excuse" to
> for resources from ARIN, due to exhaustion of resources in the proper
> to allocate the resources.
> > Were you hoping for something more along the lines of:
> > "this is nothing more than human nature at its worst, hoarding in the
> > of shortage"
> We are not referring to "hoarding". Every RIR has organizations in
> region that require all the resources of that RIR; every RIR's
> will be allocated at a certain rate and rapidly exhausted.
> Hoarding implies collecting some resources you don't need -- but
> mathematically, orgs in ARIN region need all the resources within
> a specific amount of time, or ARIN would not have been allocated
> the resources in the first place.
The hoarding comes from the bogus perspective that historical ARIN members
have a priority right to remaining space in the ARIN pool. Realistically,
that resource is to be shared amongst all ARIN members, new or old. If any
organization joins ARIN and meets all current policy requirements for how
the space will be used, there is no valid reason for constraints about what
part of the Internet that gets deployed in. It is a global Internet, so the
space might be used anywhere. This attempt at artificial restrictions on
where it gets used is nothing more than a blatant power grab.
> It is basically impossible for anything ARIN does to be "hoarding,"
> short of stopping allocations, or applying a rationing criteria such
> as APNIC's last /8 policy, that could be considered hoarding.
> The amount of addresses that were applied for and received by each
> RIR are based on the need of allocating addresses within that region.
> ARIN resources will be exhausted with no RIR shopping at all.
> > If it is not clear, I oppose as written, as well as the basic premise
> > one 'needs to protect a regional asset'. The RIRs were not created to
> > islands, they are supposed to be facilitators in distributing the
> > address pool asset. The stewardship component of that is intended to
> Each RIR is a facilitator in distributing IP addresses
> to networks and registries WITHIN that RIR's region.
> A RIR is not designed to be a facilitator in distributing IP addresses
> or setting addressing policy for networks in other regions.
Attempting to rewrite history by asserting an exclusionary mantra does not
make it so. Organizations have always been free to join any RIR and do
whatever that RIRs policy allows with any space allocated or assigned. The
BS exclusionary mindset is a direct product of regional hoarding at the end
of the free pool.
This is an exceptionally bad approach to policy, and completely inconsistent
with the notion that industry self-regulation is appropriate for managing
the valuable global resources of network addressing. If we really are
looking out for the good-of-the-whole, exclusionary tactics are out of
scope. If we really believe exclusionary tactics are appropriate, bend over
and get ready for the regulatory oversight that WILL arrive shortly ...
> It is entirely appropriate that ARIN adopt a policy similar to 155.
> With the right modifications, I would support 155.
More information about the ARIN-PPML