[arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 75, Issue 8

Rudolph Daniel rudi.daniel at gmail.com
Fri Sep 2 09:39:55 EDT 2011


Hi B
Something is always more important than something else. If ARIN's focus is
on IPv6 transition then I would suggest that ARIN is not likely to
complicate your life nor their own whilst continuing stewardship of that
which has come to an end.
Since we are a consensus driven model, the community has a pivotal role in
speeding up the transition process or at very least not restricting the push
towards IPv6.
Brett's suggests that the community will want to send out v4 patrols...but
to my way of thinking, why throw resources at slowing down the transition? I
don't see how policing run-out in this way can be regarded as positive
forward movement.
RD




> If your resources are underutilized, ARIN *could* do a section 12 audit
> and initiate reclamation.  If you don't tell anyone that you are
> underutilized, ARIN won't know, so they only way you'd get hit with an
> audit is if you got really unlucky.  If you tell the world (by putting
> them up for auction), the risks get higher, because ARIN knows (or at
> least has a strong indication) that you are underutilized.
>
> ARIN hasn't made a practice of doing that, and I agree with John's
> statement that they aren't likely to start doing that.  But if they
> don't know you are underutilized, your risk is lower than if they do
> know and you're relying on them to nevertheless refrain from an audit.
> In my view, the risk is very low either way.  But it is lower if ARIN
> doesn't have the information, and some companies are going to play it
> safe.
>
>     -- Brett
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 00:53:02 -0400
> From: Thomas Narten <narten at us.ibm.com>
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: [arin-ppml] Weekly posting summary for ppml at arin.net
> Message-ID: <201109020453.p824r2PZ006083 at rotala.raleigh.ibm.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> Total of 95 messages in the last 7 days.
>
> script run at: Fri Sep  2 00:53:02 EDT 2011
>
>    Messages   |      Bytes        | Who
> --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------
>  18.95% |   18 | 22.11% |   156076 | owen at delong.com
>  17.89% |   17 | 15.49% |   109349 | jcurran at arin.net
>  15.79% |   15 | 16.51% |   116553 | mike at nationwideinc.com
>  6.32% |    6 |  4.49% |    31695 | matthew at matthew.at
>  3.16% |    3 |  6.03% |    42591 | stephen at sprunk.org
>  5.26% |    5 |  3.84% |    27126 | sethm at rollernet.us
>  4.21% |    4 |  3.93% |    27755 | paul at redbarn.org
>  4.21% |    4 |  3.66% |    25850 | cengel at conxeo.com
>  3.16% |    3 |  4.28% |    30196 | lee at dilkie.com
>  3.16% |    3 |  2.91% |    20576 | bill at herrin.us
>  3.16% |    3 |  2.83% |    19977 | mueller at syr.edu
>  3.16% |    3 |  2.43% |    17146 | mysidia at gmail.com
>  2.11% |    2 |  2.67% |    18824 | xing.cernet at gmail.com
>  2.11% |    2 |  2.07% |    14615 | kkargel at polartel.com
>  1.05% |    1 |  1.47% |    10348 | joe at oregon.uoregon.edu
>  1.05% |    1 |  1.22% |     8585 | info at arin.net
>  1.05% |    1 |  0.88% |     6204 | narten at us.ibm.com
>  1.05% |    1 |  0.87% |     6122 | hannigan at gmail.com
>  1.05% |    1 |  0.80% |     5680 | rbf+arin-ppml at panix.com
>  1.05% |    1 |  0.77% |     5434 | scottleibrand at gmail.com
>  1.05% |    1 |  0.75% |     5287 | gary.buhrmaster at gmail.com
> --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------
> 100.00% |   95 |100.00% |   705989 | Total
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 22:16:45 -0700
> From: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
> To: Brett Frankenberger <rbf+arin-ppml at panix.com>
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....
> Message-ID: <5CDA1548-A0EF-453A-B11E-383451099047 at delong.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
> On Sep 1, 2011, at 7:14 PM, Brett Frankenberger wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 06:38:44PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> >> Mike,
> >>      What risk do you see in listing un/under-utilized resources that is
> >> not present in merely holding those resources?
> >
> > Can't say for sure, but I'd guess it's comparable to the risk that
> > exists in taking out a full page add in the local newspaper announcing
> > "I will drive 80 in the 60 MPH speed zone at milepost X on highway Y at
> > XX:XX on XX/XX/2001" that isn't present in driving 80 in a 60 but not
> > advertising when and where you will be doing it.
> >
> Except that it would be more like doing that after the chief of police and
> the commandant of the highway patrol had told you that making such
> an announcement in and of itself would not cause them to pursue you.
>
> > If your resources are underutilized, ARIN *could* do a section 12 audit
> > and initiate reclamation.  If you don't tell anyone that you are
> > underutilized, ARIN won't know, so they only way you'd get hit with an
> > audit is if you got really unlucky.  If you tell the world (by putting
> > them up for auction), the risks get higher, because ARIN knows (or at
> > least has a strong indication) that you are underutilized.
> >
>
> In spite of John's claims to the contrary, I actually believe that ARIN
> should
> begin performing random reviews as time permits and should certainly
> be looking for resources that appear to have a pattern of un/under-
> utilization.
>
> > ARIN hasn't made a practice of doing that, and I agree with John's
> > statement that they aren't likely to start doing that.  But if they
> > don't know you are underutilized, your risk is lower than if they do
> > know and you're relying on them to nevertheless refrain from an audit.
> > In my view, the risk is very low either way.  But it is lower if ARIN
> > doesn't have the information, and some companies are going to play it
> > safe.
> >
>
> John's statement wasn't that they aren't likely to start doing so. John's
> statement was that he did not feel that they should start doing so.
> John and I disagree in this area and I think at the end of the day
> as scarcity becomes more of an issue, there will be more pressure
> from the community to change John's position on this. John answers
> to the board. The board answers to the members.
>
> Owen
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 22:31:01 -0700
> From: "Michael Wallace" <michael at birdhosting.com>
> To: "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com>,    "Brett Frankenberger"
>        <rbf+arin-ppml at panix.com>
> Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....
> Message-ID: <2df584b7$652e2471$404ae486$@com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> I'm new over here.  Been reading for a couple of weeks.
>
>
> The only issue I see with IP addresses is people not even making an attempt
> to use IPv6.  We have so many IP addresses in IPv6 that we should never run
> out.  The only major issue is ISP's are not really dealing with IPv6.  I
> tried to make a pretty big push to use IPv6 but failed doing so.  Only
> because I'm getting push back from my upstream providers (Ill leave them
> unnamed).  This poses a huge problem for all of us as we are mainly trying
> to stay afloat.  As we get more and more customers,  we need more and more
> IP's.  Well if we simply cannot move to IPv6 because upstream providers,
> and customers ISP's are not allowing IPv6.
>
>
> Maybe what we all need to do as service providers is push upstream
> providers, and ISP's as a hole to start supporting IPv6.
>
>
> Once we get this, We will not have to worry about ethics of scanning IP
> allotment space to see if they are not/un utilized.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Michael Wallace
>
> ----------------------------------------
>
> From: "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com>
>
> Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 10:21 PM
>
> To: "Brett Frankenberger" <rbf+arin-ppml at panix.com>
>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....
>
>
> On Sep 1, 2011, at 7:14 PM, Brett Frankenberger wrote:
>
>
> > On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 06:38:44PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
>
> >> Mike,
>
> >>      What risk do you see in listing un/under-utilized resources that is
>
> >> not present in merely holding those resources?
>
> >
>
> > Can't say for sure, but I'd guess it's comparable to the risk that
>
> > exists in taking out a full page add in the local newspaper announcing
>
> > "I will drive 80 in the 60 MPH speed zone at milepost X on highway Y at
>
> > XX:XX on XX/XX/2001" that isn't present in driving 80 in a 60 but not
>
> > advertising when and where you will be doing it.
>
> >
>
> Except that it would be more like doing that after the chief of police and
>
> the commandant of the highway patrol had told you that making such
>
> an announcement in and of itself would not cause them to pursue you.
>
>
> > If your resources are underutilized, ARIN *could* do a section 12 audit
>
> > and initiate reclamation.  If you don't tell anyone that you are
>
> > underutilized, ARIN won't know, so they only way you'd get hit with an
>
> > audit is if you got really unlucky.  If you tell the world (by putting
>
> > them up for auction), the risks get higher, because ARIN knows (or at
>
> > least has a strong indication) that you are underutilized.
>
> >
>
>
> In spite of John's claims to the contrary, I actually believe that ARIN
> should
>
> begin performing random reviews as time permits and should certainly
>
> be looking for resources that appear to have a pattern of un/under-
>
> utilization.
>
>
> > ARIN hasn't made a practice of doing that, and I agree with John's
>
> > statement that they aren't likely to start doing that.  But if they
>
> > don't know you are underutilized, your risk is lower than if they do
>
> > know and you're relying on them to nevertheless refrain from an audit.
>
> > In my view, the risk is very low either way.  But it is lower if ARIN
>
> > doesn't have the information, and some companies are going to play it
>
> > safe.
>
> >
>
>
> John's statement wasn't that they aren't likely to start doing so. John's
>
> statement was that he did not feel that they should start doing so.
>
> John and I disagree in this area and I think at the end of the day
>
> as scarcity becomes more of an issue, there will be more pressure
>
> from the community to change John's position on this. John answers
>
> to the board. The board answers to the members.
>
>
> Owen
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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.
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110901/b2678a68/attachment-0001.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 08:18:33 +0100
> From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at>
> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
> Cc: "arin-ppml at arin.net" <arin-ppml at arin.net>
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....
> Message-ID: <4E608349.4080007 at matthew.at>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 9/1/11 11:41 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > However, you are a corner case. A microcosm.
>
> I'm sorry, but "accessing web sites from browsers and web services from
> applications" isn't "a corner case".
>
> The fact is that almost everyone with an Internet connection at their
> home or business would be perfectly happy with ports 80 and 443 working
> well and nothing else. Perhaps the occasional random UDP for VoIP (to a
> hosted VoIP service that relays all traffic anyway) but even that isn't
> strictly necessary if your TCP 80 and 443 are working well. Even the
> POP/IMAP and SMTP ports aren't needed any more, as web-based mail
> clients are all the rage.
>
> Would this be true if there hadn't ever been NAT? We'll never know...
> but it the architecture in use today, and NAT and strict firewalls don't
> break it at all.
>
> Matthew Kaufman
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 08:24:48 +0100
> From: Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at>
> To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
> Cc: Brett Frankenberger <rbf+arin-ppml at panix.com>, arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] An article of interest to the community....
> Message-ID: <4E6084C0.3040604 at matthew.at>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 9/2/11 6:16 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > On Sep 1, 2011, at 7:14 PM, Brett Frankenberger wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 06:38:44PM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
> >>> Mike,
> >>>     What risk do you see in listing un/under-utilized resources that is
> >>> not present in merely holding those resources?
> >> Can't say for sure, but I'd guess it's comparable to the risk that
> >> exists in taking out a full page add in the local newspaper announcing
> >> "I will drive 80 in the 60 MPH speed zone at milepost X on highway Y at
> >> XX:XX on XX/XX/2001" that isn't present in driving 80 in a 60 but not
> >> advertising when and where you will be doing it.
> >>
> > Except that it would be more like doing that after the chief of police
> and
> > the commandant of the highway patrol had told you that making such
> > an announcement in and of itself would not cause them to pursue you.
>
> No, it is more like taking out an ad that says "I drive 80 MPH in the 60
> MPH speed zone at milepost X on highway Y every day at 9 AM" after being
> told that making such an announcement was ok and hoping that the chief
> of police and the commandant of the highway patrol are never replaced
> with people who noticed your ad.
>
> The reason we change laws instead of just hoping the enforcers will just
> be fair despite what the language says is precisely because the
> enforcers change their minds and/or are retire and are replaced.
>
> >
> >> If your resources are underutilized, ARIN *could* do a section 12 audit
> >> and initiate reclamation.  If you don't tell anyone that you are
> >> underutilized, ARIN won't know, so they only way you'd get hit with an
> >> audit is if you got really unlucky.  If you tell the world (by putting
> >> them up for auction), the risks get higher, because ARIN knows (or at
> >> least has a strong indication) that you are underutilized.
> >>
> > In spite of John's claims to the contrary, I actually believe that ARIN
> should
> > begin performing random reviews as time permits and should certainly
> > be looking for resources that appear to have a pattern of un/under-
> > utilization.
>
> And this is even worse. We have members of the community saying "I know
> you've said that you're not going to be enforcing the speed limit for
> these flagrant violators, but I'd like you to start doing so".
>
> >
> >> ARIN hasn't made a practice of doing that, and I agree with John's
> >> statement that they aren't likely to start doing that.  But if they
> >> don't know you are underutilized, your risk is lower than if they do
> >> know and you're relying on them to nevertheless refrain from an audit.
> >> In my view, the risk is very low either way.  But it is lower if ARIN
> >> doesn't have the information, and some companies are going to play it
> >> safe.
> >>
> > John's statement wasn't that they aren't likely to start doing so. John's
> > statement was that he did not feel that they should start doing so.
> > John and I disagree in this area and I think at the end of the day
> > as scarcity becomes more of an issue, there will be more pressure
> > from the community to change John's position on this. John answers
> > to the board. The board answers to the members.
>
> And so the members have a legitimate reason to have the policy changed,
> rather than simply relying on John's word as to what he would choose to
> do this week as an indication of how policy will always be interpreted.
>
> Matthew Kaufman
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML mailing list
> ARIN-PPML at arin.net
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>
> End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 75, Issue 8
> ****************************************
>




-- 

Rudi Daniel
*danielcharles consulting<http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kingstown-Saint-Vincent-and-the-Grenadines/DanielCharles/153611257984774>
**1-784 498 8277<http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kingstown-Saint-Vincent-and-the-Grenadines/DanielCharles/153611257984774>
*
*
*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20110902/d0460f10/attachment.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list