[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-167 Removal of Renumbering Requirement for Small Multihomers

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

On 5/3/2012 12:12 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>
>> Not really true since this renumbering can be done as old equipment dies
>> and is cycled out of service.
>>
>
> Not likely in the time frame permitted by the policy being debated.
>

Which is why I suggested that if you want to make a policy modification 
of this nature a better way would be to have the NRPM allow the 
hostmaster to make an exception for extenuating circumstances, and
extend the deadline for return to beyond 1 year.

>> Your correct this is an imaginary problem if everyone followed the
>> standards.  Unfortunately not everyone does.  It is a real problem.
>> But, it is only a real problem to people who aren't following the rules,
>> and I don't cotton on to the idea of helping those kinds of people
>> make their lives easier.
>>
>
> While I agree with you philosophically, the reality is that there is a difference
> when those people are "customers" vs. when they are not.
>
> When they are "customers" you tend to have to make all kinds of accommodations
> for whatever they _WANT_ to do regardless of how it fits into your idea of what
> is right. Especially when you are a business small enough to be affected by
> this policy.
>

Except that the customers (in the example cited) really can't go 
anywhere else without the same - and likely more - pain.

Which would you rather do as a customer:

a) nothing

b) change a few IP addresses in some existing scripts you have

c) move all your scripts to a new ISP/hoster which will force you to do 
all of b) plus a bunch of extra testing.

We all know customers want a.  But in the real world you don't always 
get what you want.  In that case they are going to take b) over c).

And in this case these are end-user addresses, the
"customer" is actually an "ARIN customer" not a network customer of an 
ISP which is then a "customer" of ARIN.  The fact is use of the term
"customer" implies purchase - but IP numbers are not property and
cannot be purchased, so really your argument is misleading and
not applicable.  The end users affected are ARIN community members
that are doing the same thing you and I are doing - "renting" the use
of IP addresses from the RIR, that we do not own, and that the
entire community has the authority to say what's what about them.

The ARIN community must make policy that is for the good of ALL of it's 
community members, not just the end-user ones, it cannot simply take 
ONLY the concerns of the end users into account when making policy.

Ted

> OWen
>
>