[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-6: Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors

Blake Dunlap ikiris at gmail.com
Tue Jun 25 17:26:20 EDT 2013


Opposed due to many different reasons mentioned previously in this list.


On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com>wrote:

> A majority is >50%. Many multinationals don't have >50% of their users in
> any one region, so would be unable to get addresses anywhere if this policy
> were adopted in all five regions.
>
> If you want the test to be "more than in any other region", that would be
> a plurality, not a majority.
>
> I am opposed to this draft policy as written.
>
> Scott
>
> On Jun 25, 2013, at 10:03 AM, David Huberman <David.Huberman at microsoft.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello -
> >
> > I fully support this proposal text.
> >
> > Quote:
> >
> > "Any entity (individual or organization) requesting ARIN issued IP
> blocks must provide ARIN with proof of an established legal presence in the
> designated ARIN region, and have a majority of their technical
> infrastructure and customers in the designated ARIN region. This
> requirement applies to both IPv4 and IPv6 address space."
> >
> > The internet engineering community purposely designed the RIR system to
> be regional.  Different regions have different needs, and grow at different
> rates. Current NRPM text is deficient in the arena of defining who can, and
> cannot, request number resources from the Registry.  Importantly, staff
> have (on multiple occasions) presented the ARIN community with the
> challenge of dealing with requestors who are trying to "game" the RIR
> system by obtaining space from ARIN when the customers are primarily (and
> even exclusively) outside the ARIN region. The proposed policy text neatly
> offers staff a good tool to overcome those challenges.
> >
> > The proposed policy text is elegant and operational for a few reasons:
> >
> > 1) If a majority of an organization's customers is outside the ARIN
> region, there organization should be subject to the RIR in which their
> majority resides.  If that majority is in APAC or EMEA, and those regions
> are out of space, that challenge is out-of-scope of ARIN policy. (It is the
> purview of that region's registry and its policy making community.)
> >
> > 2) It does not impede on the ability of global backbone operators to
> request space from ARIN, so long as the ARIN region is the largest consumer
> of devices and addresses.
> >
> > 3) The use of the term "majority" presents no functional challenges to
> either requestors or staff.  Merriam-Webster has a definition of the word
> majority stating, "the greater quantity or share".
> >
> > I have only one recommended edit to the text.  I recommend replacing "IP
> blocks" with "number resources", so that the text precisely captures the
> activities of the Registry.
> >
> > Yours,
> > David Huberman
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20130625/686f72b0/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list