[arin-ppml] IP Address Policy
zolla at neonet.org
Wed Aug 8 23:50:32 EDT 2012
I can understand you frustration and can sympathize. I also understand the policy all too well as my organization did follow the procedure to obtain a /22 assignment. Consequently we did readdress at a reasonable pace and with good planning. Most ISPs require multiple year contracts to obtain optimal pricing so there is nothing here that your organization can’t overcome like the rest of us did. I don’t normally get involved in these discussions as I don’t follow ARIN policy close enough to provide much insight, but in this particular instance the opinion of the community is what you asked for. I did my due diligence to get the assignment my organization has, just like many other organizations like me. The path ARIN policy has you follow may not seem optimal for you, but it does have merit. It is my impression that you feel there is a hidden agenda to prevent your company from getting the IP addressing it is rightfully owed. While I commend the effort to change policy you don’t believe in, threating legal action and questioning someone’s character are not the ways to make change. Like you said, constructive comments and active discussion are great, but you lose credibility in my mind when you go beyond that.
Assistant Director, Network Manager
(330)926-3900 ext. 601110
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Steven Ryerse
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 11:27 PM
Cc: John Curran; ARIN PPML (ppml at arin.net) (ppml at arin.net)
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IP Address Policy
I appreciate constructive comments. It certainly is good that ARIN tries to listen to the Internet community as that is who they serve. However they do this voluntarily and the community does not have any real legal vote. The fact that the CEO & Board of Directors tries to listen to the community is of course positive but they have absolutely no legal requirement to do so. They are a US corporation of whatever flavor and as such are actually bound by the corporate laws of the United States. The CEO and board have a fiduciary responsibility just like any corporation. It is their duty to honor that responsibility or they should not hold office. If there are policies that are contrary to their mission they have a fiduciary responsibility to either change or remove the policy or they need to change the mission they were chartered under. I’m glad they exist and I have no beef with them as long as they do what they are chartered to do.
It is pretty clear to me that they are doing the opposite of their mission in this instance. It does not destroy any trust if they do what they are chartered to do. They sometimes make decisions that are not shared with the community and which may be at odds with this community, but as long as they are following their charter then it is their right and responsibility to do so. In this case there is a policy which I believe is contrary to their mission and they should act accordingly which is their right and responsibility as well. I don’t know why you would think “He rightly can” if it is contrary to his mission. Why would you want him to do things contrary to his mission? Make no sense.
Upstream does not meet our competitive needs. If this community does not decide to change this policy then the courts eventually will. Maybe my case will be used by some smart attorney somewhere to do just that. Hopefully it won’t come to that as I hope reasonable ness prevails here!
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℠
From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com]<mailto:[mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 10:48 PM
To: Steven Ryerse
Cc: John Curran; ARIN PPML (ppml at arin.net<mailto:ppml at arin.net>) (ppml at arin.net<mailto:ppml at arin.net>)
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IP Address Policy
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com<mailto:SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com>> wrote:
John, you seem to miss my point so let me be very clear.
I think you may be missing the point. ARIN is a body that supports a rule making community.
In addition to being the Secretariat for the community, they are the org that does the allocation and assigning according to community set policies.
There are policies in place. You are asking for the Secretariat to ignore them.
I HAVE ALREADY MADE A REASONABLE VALID REQUEST FOR INTERNET RESOURCES AND YOUR ORGANIZATION HAS TURNED ME DOWN!
not valid according to current policy, so you can get policy changed OR follow Jimmy's advice.
I am formally requesting here and now that you review my request and approve it. That is the only way I am going to drop my request. It is not reasonable to tell me to wait for months since others who get allocations don’t have to wait for months. 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.
While that may be true, it would destroy a great deal of trust in the entire global Internet resource administration regime. In other words, you are demanding that the CEO override the policies that he has a duty to uphold in order for you to get your data center going.
Then in the future when ARIN gets similar requests from others your staff should approve them as well. That fulfills your mission!
It doesn't actually, since the mission includes following policies set by us (we are ARIN).
You cannot use this community as your reason why you won’t fully fulfill your mission and your fiduciary responsibility as President & CEO.
He rightly can IMHO.
Policies that originate from this community still have to be voted on and approved by you and your board of directors as this community has no legal standing in your organization. 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. 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.
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’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.
See the advice from others on a third way (getting an assignment from an upstream, at least for the short-term).
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. If that request were to be denied then I would come back to this community and ask for their help.
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.
Actually the choice is yours, you can get a PA block from an upstream, work on changing policy, find a block on the transfer market, etc.
I would also ask everyone in this community to share your thoughts on this issue as it is very important.
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 1473 bytes
More information about the ARIN-PPML