[arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

Thu Aug 9 13:14:07 EDT 2012

If you plan to continue railing against every response, please do us all the favor of being well informed by reading the Number Resource Policy Manual and the Policy Development Process information folks keep trying to provide you.

The minimum assignment window for a multihomed enduser is a /24.  (https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four32)  Your customer that has 600 end users, for whom it would be such a hardship to renumber, could probably qualify.  An organization of that size may see the other benefits of being multihomed, even if they are not so today.  If this, or any other of your customers has 5 IP addresses, each should be able to renumber within a couple of months.  No one said it all had to be done in a weekend.  I doubt you will find much sympathy for small renumbering projects.  As you have already heard in several responses, many folks here have completed renumbering projects both for ISP allocations and other reasons.   Having personally renumbered out of a /10 and several other netblocks for my employer, several netblocks at home, and having helped numerous customers through the process, I can say it does take planning, it does take work, but plenty of people have conquered the complexities of renumbering networks.

As for my personal opinion, I'm in favor of the slow start model (https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four214) I think it does a good job of trying to strike a balance between aggregation, conservation, and preventing fraud.  I think that it gives new entrants time to see how their network will grow.

Regarding your comment, "In fact I would do that if ARIN allowed it and it could be done on less than a /24."  See earlier comment. It is not "ARIN" that would have to "allow" it, but the ARIN community.  The people actually using the IP's must first agree to change the policy to lower the minimum assignment window.  "ARIN" doesn't decide prefix filtering boundaries and practices, the internet community does.  If you read the NRPM, you will see phrases like "routability not guaranteed"  ARIN doesn't guarantee that anyone will accept your prefix, regardless of size.

--Heather

________________________________

From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Steven Ryerse
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 4:02 AM
To: Heather.skanks
Cc: John Curran; ARIN PPML (ppml at arin.net)(ppml at arin.net)
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

Well now that is constructive isn’t it.  I don’t see how this comment helps anyone in this community.  I think it would be more helpful if you disagree with my opinion to just state that.  Then maybe there is a chance at something positive coming out of these submissions.  I might also offer this question to you: If an organization our size can’t get approval for an IP address block from ARIN, just exactly how do you think one of our customers whose IP needs are much smaller than ours is going to get approved.  I can’t wait to hear the solution.  Do you really think I should be recommending my customers who only need 5 IP addresses to apply for independent space so they can have independence – what a great idea.

In fact I would do that if ARIN allowed it and it could be done on less than a /24.  Doubt that will ever happen though.  I have made sure my customers are listed as the Administrative contact for their web domain names for about 15 years now even though I could have put their domain names in our name and married them to us in that way.  Some companies actually do try to look out for the best interests of their customers.  Those are the companies that keep customers for a long time.

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

Description: Description: Description: Description: Eclipse Networks Logo_small.png℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.

        Conquering Complex Networks℠

From: Heather.skanks [mailto:heather.skanks at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 3:13 AM
To: Steven Ryerse
Cc: Zolla, Christopher; McTim; John Curran; ARIN PPML (ppml at arin.net)(ppml at arin.net)
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

Then why aren't you advising and helping your customer get provider independent space from ARIN so they can drop you without the hassle of renumbering?  When it becomes competitively advantageous of course..

--heather

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 9, 2012, at 12:15 AM, Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com> wrote:

        Glad to hear from you!  Hopefully more will respond.  I don’t recall threatening any legal action on my part over this in any of my submissions.  If you inferred that I am very unhappy over ARIN denying my request then you inferred correctly.  I did say that there are larger company’s out there who might want to use a denial like mine for their legal purposes.  Of course any legal action would be counterproductive and should only be used as a last resort after all reasonable avenues have been explored.  I would never threaten to sue someone unless I actually intended to do so and I didn’t here.  I also haven’t questioned anyone’s character.  I don’t think this policy is against our company, I think it is against all smaller companies.  Sounds like you agree with that based on your actual experience.  I don’t see anything in ARIN’s mission statement that says that they are only to serve larger organizations.  They need to serve us and you as well!

        Renumbering in the future is out of the question as for just one of my customers it affects over 600 end users.  It is a physical impossibility since they would all have to be renumbered over a weekend and there isn’t enough time in a weekend to do it all.  I’m not willing to risk significant customers business in the hope that an upstream provider would let us keep an IP block.

        There is a lot of theoretical discussion in a community like this which is mostly productive.  In the real world that you and I have to live in there is competition that wants to sell similar services to the ones we sell.  When bandwidth prices go down significantly as they have just in the last year, I have to be able to purchase from the less expensive vendor just like my competitors do - or they will take my customers by offering lower prices.  If I'm locked into a long term contract just to keep my IP addresses then I can't switch to the lower cost vendor and then I can't compete with my competitors lower price.

        So I really don't have a choice.  I have to control my own IP addresses, and ARIN, which is a monopoly has denied my request.  A request which is very reasonable.  One /22 is peanuts compared to all of the /8's out there in legacy status.  Anyone who can demonstrate a need should be able to get a /22.  In my opinion for ARIN to deny my reasonable request is a blatant disregard and is opposite of their mission.  ARIN publicly states that no address blocks should change hands without their involvement and approval, but when they deny a request like mine they force a secondary market to exist which they don't control and don't like.  Doesn’t make sense.  They can either fix the policy to make it more reasonable or the secondary market will take away their monopoly status by creating an above ground second market and the beginnings of that are happening already.  I hope I don't have to utilize that market but I have a business to run.

        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

        <image001.jpg>℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.

                Conquering Complex Networks℠

        From: Zolla, Christopher [mailto:zolla at neonet.org]
        Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 11:51 PM
        To: Steven Ryerse; McTim
        Cc: John Curran; ARIN PPML (ppml at arin.net) (ppml at arin.net)
        Subject: RE: [arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

        Steven,

        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.

        Christopher Zolla
        Assistant Director, Network Manager
        NEOnet
        (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
        To: McTim
        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

        President

        100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338

        770.656.1460 - Cell

        770.399.9099 - Office

        770.392-0076 - Fax

        <image001.jpg>℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.

                Conquering Complex Networks℠

        From: McTim [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) (ppml at arin.net)
        Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

        Hi Steven,

        On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:19 PM, Steven Ryerse <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.

        See above.

        --
        Cheers,

        McTim
        "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

        _______________________________________________
        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.