[arin-ppml] IP Address Policy

Seth Mattinen sethm at rollernet.us
Thu Aug 9 18:28:32 EDT 2012

On 8/9/12 3:17 PM, Christoph Blecker wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Steven Ryerse
> <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com> wrote:
>> Thank you very much for clearing up the record.  I do stand by my original
>> point that it is not reasonable to deny resources solely because of
>> organization size.  The BGP policy discriminates against smaller
>> organizations and that is why I am making such a fuss over it.  As I
>> mentioned I will be formally submitting my proposed change to ARIN policies
>> that I submitted in my first post on this subject.  This is the very simple
>> policy that I am going to propose:
>> “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.”
> How do you define "reasonably demonstrate"? How would you protect
> against abuse/fraud (such as setting up a shell company, submitting a
> request for IPs, and getting them without further justification)? With
> IPs being a limited resource, would you advocate to reclaim the IPs if
> they aren't in use (being that getting them from ARIN is so easy)?

We may as well just scrap the whole NRPM if ARIN is granted such an
unrestricted override.

While I'm sure the OP thinks the request was reasonable I'm dubious that
it was or ARIN would have granted it. I've never seen a case where
anyone at ARIN factored in a vendetta as part of a request. Most of us
have been through the request process several times, including being
turned down.

And besides, we already have immediate need covered in section 4.2.1.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list