[arin-ppml] ARIN Multiple Discrete Networks Policy

[Owen DeLong]

On Oct 2, 2011, at 7:32 PM, Kevin Blumberg wrote:

> John,
> 
> I've been following this thread and a couple questions come to mind.
> 
> 1) In the case of a dispute between ARIN and a member what recourse mechanism is there?
> 2) How many times has this policy been accepted/rejected in the past 2 years? 
> 
> If I had  a scenario like this:
> 
> Toronto
> Diverse Paths
> 
> Calgary
> Diverse Paths
> 
> Would the MDN policy apply? If I decided later on to add an interconnection to move certain traffic
> between the cities would the MDN policy still apply?
> 

In my experience using this policy:

1.	Yes.
2.	Yes, if the interconnect was not of sufficient bandwidth to carry the full
	internet-derived load from A to B or vice versa.

Owen

> Kevin Blumberg
> T 416.214.9473 x31
> F 416.862.9473
> kevinb at thewire.ca  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of John Curran
> Sent: Sunday, October 02, 2011 5:58 PM
> To: Jimmy Hess
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net List
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN Multiple Discrete Networks Policy
> 
> On Oct 2, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> 
>> n Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 7:07 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> that they can readily reallocate their existing allocations across 
>>> interconnected network infrastructure have been determined NOT to 
>>> have "multiple discrete networks", even if such reallocation would 
>>> result in a routing impact.
>> 
>> The determination is flawwed.   First of all, it's not mentioned in
>> the policy that
>> "networks that are capable of readily reallocating their existing 
>> allocations across interconnected
>> network infrastructure with routing impact"    are to be considered
>> non-discrete.
> 
> Jimmy - Read the policy text. There is no definition of a _discrete_ network contained therein.  It's fairly easy to distinguish some discrete networks from the examples, but it is not clear at all how interconnected network infrastructure qualifies as "discrete".
> 
>> If the applicant can determine that their networks are discrete based 
>> on the criteria for operating discrete networks, then their networks 
>> are discrete, regardless of the technical possibility of reallocating 
>> existing allocations.
> 
> Correct, as I note above.
> 
>> Second,   just because it's technically feasible for "existing
>> allocations to be reallocated"
>> across interconnected network infrastructure,  does not mean it would 
>> be appropriate to do so.  There may be a performance or cost impact 
>> that causes this to be extremely
>> problematic.     There may be a reliability impact with regards to the
>> operator's network
>> design, and survivability requirements,   there might be legal issues, etc.
> 
> Exactly, and we ask exactly those type of questions searching for a compelling need for their treatment of their interconnected network infrastructure as "multiple discrete networks".
> 
> Thanks,
> /John
> 
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.