[arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Wed Aug 8 23:02:50 EDT 2012


On Aug 8, 2012, at 10:19 PM, Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com<mailto:SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com>> wrote:

What is reasonable is for you to go to your staff and have them reopen my request #20120801-X7252 and have them allocate us the /22 IP v4 block requested.  Simple.  You definitely do have the power as President & CEO to do that if you decide to.

Not quite correct, as I am obligated (and honored) to follow the policies that
have been adopted by the ARIN Board of Trustees.

Policies that originate from this community still have to be voted on and
approved by you and your board of directors

The particular policy language that you do not qualify under is in ARIN's
Number Resource Policy Manual (NRPM), Section 4.2.2.2
(Initial Allocation to ISPs - Multihomed) -

    "When requesting a /22, demonstrate the efficient utilization of a minimum
     contiguous or noncontiguous /23 (two /24s) from an upstream."

This policy language in question was adopted by the Board of Trustees
on 29 September 2004, in the first enumerated version of the NRPM.
<https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm_changelog.html>

That vote is what puts those policies in force and since you and your board
of directors have the power to both approve, change, and remove policies
without input from this community - you can do so here if you want to.

Actually, the Board is fairly rigorous about such changes, and follows the
ARIN Policy Development Process which I referenced earlier.  This provides
that any policy changes are fully discussed by the community in open and
transparent manner.

In fact you have a fiduciary duty to do just that if any policy currently
in force is determined to be contrary to your mission, regardless of
what this community thinks.

Indeed.  The Board of Trustees must be the judge of our performance
in compliance of our mission, and they adopted the policies in question.

This is a clear case where the policy is contrary to your mission,
therefore you should take the appropriate steps to rectify that ASAP.

I will note this discussion to the ARIN Board of Trustees, but they are
quite unlikely to overturn existing policy without a compelling mandate
from the community.

 I’m not going away.   As I said in my first post we have to have these
resources one way or the other TO STAY IN BUSINESS.  I prefer ARIN
allocate them to us per my request through normal channels.  If that
request ultimately fails I will be forced to go off-channel and fulfill my
request with a Legacy block that ARIN does not have an agreement on.
Unfortunately those are my only two choices.  If I’m forced to go that
route then I will of course come back to your web site and make a request
for ARIN to update your database to show our new assignment of additional
Legacy addresses.  Requesting that from ARIN is the right and proper thing
to do since I don’t want to hide anything or lie to ARIN in any way.

As I noted earlier, we have a specified transfer policy for just such occasions,
and will promptly process any valid transfer request that you submit.

John, the choice is yours, you can fulfill your mission and allocate resources
or you can force us to go elsewhere.  I would appreciate it if you would
approve our allocation request.

ARIN can't approve a request which is invalid per adopted policy; I actually
do not get any choice in this matter.  I do wish you best in whatever course
of action you choose.

Thanks!
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20120809/60310bbb/attachment.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list