[arin-ppml] Ip allocation

Mon Apr 28 22:57:43 EDT 2014

Hello Andrew and Derek,

I attended ARIN33 and met with Andrew Dul and three other members of the
AC to discuss the need for IPv4 numbers for new entrants following ARIN
runout.  As a result of this issue, we have collaborated to create a
draft policy 

https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/ARIN_prop_207_orig.html

to solve the problem as indicated by Andrew Dul.  This policy will solve
three problems that I can see:

1) sets up a pool of IP's, size /10, for new entrants, once ARIN runs
out.  My interpretation is that, now that
ARIN is down to a /8, this leaves 4 /10's.  ARIN will chew through 3
/10's and when it hits the 4th, this /10 will
be used for new entrants and companies like Derek's to get additional
IP's;

2) it sets the obtainable block size at a minimum of a /28, with a
maximum of a /22, for an entity;

3) it is a one time allocation;  once a company makes a claim for
resources under this policy, it cannot make a second claim.

I commend Andrew Dul for his speed, accuracy, and effectiveness in
getting this draft out.  Great job!  Although the policy is not perfect
in terms of content, (I would normally be opposed to the needs
language), it is an emergency situation, and an excellent compromise
that meets most requirements of progressive internet thinkers.

I support this policy and encourage immediate adoption.

Best Regards,
Sandra Brown
IPv4 Market Group

___________________________________________________________________________

A proposal has been submitted into the PDP process based upon feedback
and breakout discussions that occurred at the last meeting. I believe
this proposal may help with the issue which started this thread.

https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/ARIN_prop_207_orig.html

There is also another group of folks working on a proposal to update
section 4.2.2 based upon feedback received at the meeting and the policy
experience report
(https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_33/PDF/monday/nobile_policy.pdf)
presented at the meeting. I suspect we will also have another proposal
submitted to the policy development process shortly.

Andrew

On 4/28/2014 5:16 PM, Steven Ryerse wrote:
> I agree it is past time to do this as it is ARIN's reason to exist to allocate. 
>
>
> Steven Ryerse
> President
> 100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338
> www.eclipse-networks.com
> 770.656.1460 - Cell
> 770.399.9099- Office
>
> ? Eclipse Networks, Inc.
> Conquering Complex Networks?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of David Huberman
> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 8:13 PM
> To: Michael Peddemors; arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Ip allocation
>
> Full support. Making a single ISP initial allocation criteria that opens a /22 (or more!) to all first timers would be about 10 years past due, but still helpful to the community ARIN serves.
>
> David R Huberman
> Microsoft Corporation
> Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)
>
> ________________________________________
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> on behalf of Michael Peddemors <michael at linuxmagic.com>
> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 4:45:20 PM
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Ip allocation
>
> Actually, this is timely, and you probably started at the right place, what would be needed though is for someone to write up a draft resolution to this affect, to change current policies.
>
> I was just talking to several parties regarding the same issue, and while there might have been justification in the past, when routing issues were a greater concern than running out of IPv4 space, but given the current situation, maybe it is time to rethink this policy.
>
> In the mean time, you are faced in getting two upstream providers to route to your prospective /22. I know, it doesn't make too much sense that the small guy should bear the burden of extra costs etc.. for being honest about his projected requirements..
>
> Any other support out there for policy changes in this area?
>
> On 14-04-28 04:33 PM, Derek Calanchini wrote:
>> Hello all, I will be brief as possible. I need assistance with either 
>> requesting a policy change or an appeal/exception to current policy.
>>
>> I started business in 1995 with 4 Class C's assigned from Integra ( 
>> /22 ). I am a full service IT provider offering pretty much 
>> everything but connectivity. Over the years I have developed my 
>> network such that I am using my IP's very efficiently. Host headers 
>> on most web sites, internal IP's whenever possible, and of course 
>> certain thing must be static, single IP's on a host.
>>
>> I am moving in less then a year to a new office, and taking the 
>> opportunity to get on the ATT fiber backbone rather then 4 bonded 
>> T-1's from Integra (which is very expensive) Integra tells me I can 
>> not take my IP's with me, and ATT tells me the largest block they will 
>> give me is a single class C.
>>
>> So I went out to Arin and setup my account and requested a /22 which 
>> was denied because the smallest block they will give a single homed 
>> ISP is a
>> /20 (4096 ip's)
>>
>> I feel like I am being penalized for using my IP's efficiently!! As I 
>> see it, I only have one option: Rework my network so every site I 
>> host uses it's own dedicated IP so that I can justify needing a 
>> /20...in which case I feel I would be doing the internet community a disservice.
>>
>> Can anyone provided feedback on how to better resolve this? How do I 
>> start getting the policy changed? Is there a process I can go through 
>> to get an exemption? Would excalation my request be of any use?
>>
>> With the IP 4 space dwindling, wouldn't it be a better policy to allow 
>> small business to get only what they need?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Derek Calanchini
>> Owner
>> Creative Network Solutions
______________________________________________________________________________