[arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

Scott Leibrand scottleibrand at gmail.com
Wed Aug 8 18:02:41 EDT 2012


Steven,

Are you planning to use the /22 to number your own equipment, or to
reassign to downstream customers?  ARIN policy has two different sections
that apply to those two different cases.  For the End User policy (
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four322) "the minimum block of IP
address space assigned is a /24".  For ISPs,
https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four222 (the section you quoted) is
what applies.

-Scott

On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Steven Ryerse
<SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com>wrote:

>  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*
>
> *President*
>
> *100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338*
>
> *770.656.1460 - Cell*
>
> *770.399.9099 - Office*
>
> *770.392-0076 - Fax*
>
> ** **
>
> [image: Description: Description: Description: Description: Eclipse
> Networks Logo_small.png]℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.****
>
>         Conquering Complex Networks℠****
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20120808/31f06045/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1473 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20120808/31f06045/attachment.jpg>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list