[arin-ppml] Justifying an ISP /22
rcarpen at network1.net
Tue Apr 16 21:05:00 EDT 2013
I think the criteria should be:
1. Be an ISP with *any* amount of space from an upstream
2. Be able to justify a 3-month need for a /22
3. Have upstream ISPs that refuse to hand out any more PA space (which appears to be the rule rather than the exception now) (I'm not sure how one would go about proving this, but I have seen situations where the upstream would likely write a letter of support)
4. Be forced to take an automatic IPv6 allocation (at whatever NRPM-supported size is appropriate (preferably /32 min.))
I also think this should be expanded to being able to get a larger initial allocation if you can justify the need.
e.g. if an ISP has a /20 from an upstream, but has a justified need for a /18, they should be able to jump right to the /18 without having to get the /20 first. This would reduce the amount of work needed.
----- Original Message -----
> (Moving this over to a new thread on PPML to discuss the policy aspects...)
> Do you have any other ideas for how to justify that an ISP really needs a /22
> from the free pool, that would be easier than getting PA, using it, and then
> Or, let's say you could get a /22 from the transfer market with minimal
> justification (just that you're an actual network operator, say). Would it
> have been worth your while to pay market price for the addresses and avoid
> the application and renumbering hassles?
> On Apr 16, 2013, at 4:36 PM, "Serge Paquin" <serge at skycomp.ca> wrote:
> > As for the Barrier to Entry; I don't believe it is the fees so much (The
> > fee was not our issue at all) as the very hard time to justify the initial
> > /22 allocation. Until you already have space swiped to you from your ISP
> > and in production you can't get a direct assignment since you can't prove
> > need.
> > Then when you get your allocation you have a timeframe to renumber your now
> > production clients into the new space and hand back your ISP allocated
> > space.
> > We did this a couple years ago and it was a major undertaking in additional
> > costs of staff, tech support and scheduling to work with each client to
> > renumber.
> > It was a business decision that we'd be a more stable and healthy company
> > having our own IP space and set forth with that goal in mind and accepted
> > the cost but it was a lot more than the ARIN fees.
> > I do have to say that the ARIN support staff were helpful and we had no
> > issues dealing with them. We just had to meet all the criteria before
> > they could issue us a direct allocation of course.
> > Serge.
> 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:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-PPML