[arin-ppml] ARIN Multiple Discrete Networks Policy

[Owen DeLong]

On Oct 2, 2011, at 2:38 PM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 02, 2011 at 09:18:33PM +0000, John Curran wrote:
>> 
>> Alas, the policy makes clear that there must be a compelling need.
> 
> For the record, the policy says absolutely nothing about a compelling 
> need. It lists some examples of why some organizations require multiple 

Um... Here's the policy:

4.5. Multiple Discrete Networks

Organizations with multiple discrete networks desiring to request new or additional address space under a single Organization ID must meet the following criteria:
The organization shall be a single entity and not a consortium of smaller independent entities.
The organization must have compelling criteria for creating discrete networks. Examples of a discrete network might include:
Regulatory restrictions for data transmission,
Geographic distance and diversity between networks,
Autonomous multihomed discrete networks.
The organization must keep detailed records on how it has allocated space to each location, including the date of each allocation.
When applying for additional internet address registrations from ARIN, the organization must demonstrate utilization greater than 50% of both the last block allocated and the aggregate sum of all blocks allocated from ARIN to that organization. If an organization is unable to satisfy this 50% minimum utilization criteria, the organization may alternatively qualify for additional internet address registrations by having all unallocated blocks of addresses smaller than ARIN's current minimum allocation size.
The organization may not allocate additional address space to a location until each of that location's address blocks are 80% utilized.
The organization should notify ARIN at the time of the request their desire to apply this policy to their account.


I've added just a little emphasis and increased the font size of 4.5.2 in the hopes that it will allow you to see the part of the policy you apparently failed to read.


> discrete networks, says that you need to prove a compelling reason for 
> doing it, and has a states a bunch of of other requirements which must 
> be met to use the policy. If all of these line up, I fail to understand 

Admittedly, it uses the word criteria instead of reason, but, I think picking
apart the synonyms really isn't necessary. The meaning seems relatively
clear to me and it indicates that you need a compelling reason (criteria)
for not giving the networks a common routing policy.

> how you can exclude an organization based on a requirement which DOESN'T 
> exist in the policy. You've also refused to address the point that if 
> this rule was actually applied anywhere else, it would exclude almost 
> every other applicant.
> 

Since the requirement does exist in the policy, QED, the rest is specious.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20111003/130e45b3/attachment.htm>