[arin-ppml] Bootstrapping new entrants after IPv4 exhaustion

Brian Jones bjones at vt.edu
Fri Nov 22 15:41:11 EST 2013

See below:


On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

> On Nov 22, 2013, at 11:25 AM, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
> > On 11/22/13, 08:50 , Brandon Ross wrote:
> >> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, Jo Rhett wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'd like to see some actual documented issues with this. Almost
> >>> everyone I know is sitting on large amounts of smaller blocks they can
> >>> easily allocate to people. It's the larger (/21 or greater) blocks
> >>> which are becoming scarce.
> >>
> >> What kind of documentation are you looking for?
> >
> > I would think an a copy of an email or a letter from the upstream which
> confirms the upstream can't/won’t provide them address space, for some
> reason other than they don't think the customer justifies additional
> address space.
> >
> David, I think that would be fine documentation to submit to ARIN under my
> proposal, but I don’t think it addresses what Jo was asking for.
> I believe Jo is asking to see documentation that this is an actual problem
> that needs solving.
> > It is unfair for ARIN to withhold address space because the upstream has
> address space but won't provide it to the requester for what ever reason.
>  I think it is reasonable to require some confirming documentation that the
> upstream is not providing address space.  You can't just "say" your ISP is
> not providing it.
> >
> > However, if an ISP is saying you don’t justify additional address space,
> then you shouldn’t qualify for address space from ARIN under an exception
> like this.
> >
> Agreed…
> > Also, ARIN should be able to refuse if they feel there is collusion
> between an ISP and a requester.
> This is trickier. incorporating how ARIN feels into policy is an
> interesting concept. Not one I am particularly comfortable with, and, in my
> experience, neither is ARIN staff.
> I will, however, say that the collusion I think you are talking about
> would basically qualify as fraud and that I believe there is already
> sufficient policy to deal with situations where ARIN staff suspects that a
> request is fraudulent.

​I agree with Dave's points, but maybe "feel" is the wrong word. Could
possibly replace with "determine" but then you have to define what
determines collusion... I see what you mean. This is trickier.


> Owen
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20131122/a6b05716/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list