[arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

Steven Ryerse SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com
Wed Aug 8 17:51:09 EDT 2012

Well, I’m in a quandary and I have decided to come to this Community for help.  I am addressing this submission to both the Community and to John Curran as the chief representative for ARIN.  We are in the process of building a data center complete with redundant power with Diesel Generator, redundant fiber Internet lines, and the usual data center redundancy stuff.

We recently purchased our 2nd Metro Ethernet fiber Internet line and I requested and received from ARIN an AS number to be able to run BGP  between our two Metro-E lines.  As I have mentioned previously I am the holder of one single Legacy /24 IP Block that I received in 1994.  We have begun to bring customers into our data center and we have almost used up this /24 block.  So, last week I went back to ARIN and requested the minimum available block size that ARIN will allocate for the purposes of using it with BGP.  I believe that the minimum for this is a /22 block and coincidentally that is what we need for the next year or so to run our data center.  So far so good.  From reading the constant posts to this community I was kind of expecting to be asked to justify if our current block was used up but was surprised when my request was Denied.  The blurb they used to deny my request said:

To qualify for an initial allocation under the multi-homed policy, you must:
- demonstrate an intent to immediately multi-home;
- demonstrate you've been reassigned a /23 (or equivalent) from your upstream ISP(s); and
- provide data to verify the /23 (or equivalent) is efficiently used.

We are multi-homing immediately and we have both of our lines installed so that isn’t an issue.  The /23 requirement surprised me because one of the primary reasons why an organization uses BGP is to achieve Internet Line Vendor independence.  Utilizing an IP block from one of my upstream providers (AT&T & TW Telecom), takes away our flexibility to change upstream providers easily since their assigned IP Block would go away if I changed to a different upstream provider.  With Fiber Internet pricing falling we can’t be locked into an upstream provider for economic reasons.  Rescinding an IP Address range from an existing customer who is using it because of a change  in an upstream provider would cause hardship to our customers and a possible loss of business to us as they might leave our data center if they were forced to change.

When I pointed out to ARIN that I did not want to have to renumber in the future their response was:

Thank you for the reply. We understand what you're saying, for sure, but unfortunately, ARIN policy does not allow us to provide an ISP for the purposes of running BGP. Based on the information provided in your request, you do not qualify to receive an initial allocation from ARIN under any current policy.

So because of ARIN’s policies and their unwillingness to assign me additional IPv4 resources, I am left with only one other viable solution.  That is to go out on the open market (thru Bankruptcy Court or not)  and buy a Legacy /22 from somebody who has one to sell and pay them for it and use that block.  I would prefer not to go around ARIN and prefer to get the IP Block we need directly from ARIN – but - I have now tried to do that without success.  I think our request was reasonable based on actual need.  I didn’t request something crazy like a /20 or whatever.

Therefore I am looking for help from this community.  Based on what ARIN has told me I won’t qualify for a /22 unless I first get a block from one of my upstream providers which I won’t do because it locks me into a vendor.  So either the Policy has to change or I have to purchase a Legacy block independent of ARIN.

I somewhat doubt based on all the submissions that I have observed in this community that I can achieve a change in ARIN’s policy but I’ll give that a try.

ARIN’s Mission Statement from their website states:   “Applying the principles of stewardship, ARIN, a nonprofit corporation, allocates Internet Protocol resources; develops consensus-based policies; and facilitates the advancement of the Internet through information and educational outreach.”

In keeping with ARIN’s mission of “facilitates the advancement of the Internet”, I propose that an addition to the set of ARIN’s policies be made that says the following:

“Regardless of any other ARIN Policy,  ARIN will allocate an IP block matching ARIN’s current Minimum IP Block Size, to any organization or entity that can reasonably demonstrate a need for an IP block.”  (I will let ARIN determine the appropriate Policy number.)

It is my strong opinion that ARIN should not be in the business of denying minimum sized IP blocks (IPv4 or IPv6) to anyone who can demonstrate a need for Internet resources!  Such denials go directly against ARIN’s Mission of “facilitating the advancement of the Internet”.  This simple policy change incorporates the “Stewardship” aspect of ARIN’s mission by requiring the demonstration of need, and also incorporates the “allocation of IP resources” which is also part of ARIN’s mission statement.  Finally it provides ARIN and this community with the flexibility of determining  what the current minimum IP Block sizes should be – now and into the future.

Note that ARIN was more than happy to assign us an IPv6 address block when I requested one a couple of months ago.  So we ARE acceptable to receive a reasonable sized IPv6 block from ARIN but NOT acceptable to receive a reasonable sized IPv4 block.  In my opinion this is inconsistent and arbitrary and is fundamentally opposite of the mission as outlined in ARIN’s Mission Statement.  ARIN should have the right to set a reasonable minimum block size for both IPv4 and IPv6 but they shouldn’t have the right to approve one and deny the other to the same organization to meet the same need!

So fellow community members and ARIN staff,  is there a consensus to enact my proposed policy addition, or am I to be forced to go outside of the normal ARIN allocation process to meet my organization’s needs?  This submission is intended to be constructive and I hope it is received that way.   I look forward to constructive input from this community.

Steven L Ryerse
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338
770.656.1460 - Cell
770.399.9099 - Office
770.392-0076 - Fax

[Description: Description: Description: Description: Eclipse Networks Logo_small.png]℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
        Conquering Complex Networks℠

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20120808/fcfe4c14/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1473 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20120808/fcfe4c14/attachment.jpg>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list