[arin-ppml] 2014-3 Remove 8.2/8.3/8.4 Minimum IPv4 Block Size Requirements

David Huberman David.Huberman at microsoft.com
Wed Mar 19 14:04:19 EDT 2014


Hi Scott,

If I understand your argument - and I'm not sure I do, sorry - you're saying that it's good to have a policy that SPs can point to and say, "no, you can't take that /32 we assigned to you with you"?  If that's what you're arguing, then why is a /24 any different than a /32? We see /24s assigned by SPs to their customers all the time.

Secondly, if this is your argument, why is this not a matter for legal and contracts, rather than a number registry which is not appointed by the IETF or NANOG or any other engineering body as the regulator of what size block is acceptable to regulate? I'm not being flippant and I'm not trying to be a jerk.  I think this kind of reasoning (and 1000 apologies if I misunderstood your argument) is way outside the purview of ARIN.

Thanks!
/david

David R Huberman
Microsoft Corporation
Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)

From: Scott Leibrand [mailto:scottleibrand at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 11:00 AM
To: David Huberman
Cc: ARIN-PPML List
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2014-3 Remove 8.2/8.3/8.4 Minimum IPv4 Block Size Requirements

I am not speaking in favor of the status quo (a /24 minimum transfer size).

However, IMO having a /32 IPv4 minimum transfer size (no limit) would be a bad idea.  There have been several cases where entities who are completely ignorant of Internet routing think they have some "right" to a particular /32, and wish to transfer it.  IMO, having *some* minimum transfer size is a good way to prevent such efforts from being imposed on the rest of us.  (If ARIN can point to policy saying "that simply isn't allowed", they're in a much better position than trying to argue the particulars of each case.)

I would have no problem reducing the minimum IPv4 transfer size, just not all the way to /32.  So I oppose the proposal as written, but could support a revised version.

-Scott

On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 10:27 AM, David Huberman <David.Huberman at microsoft.com<mailto:David.Huberman at microsoft.com>> wrote:
Hello,

As the author, I proposed this policy because it is not ARIN's role to artificially regulate minimum block sizes. I feel this is especially in a post-exhaustion world, which is very quickly coming.

The economics of routing are the same today as they were 14 years ago when Bill Manning taught me an important principal: people will pay to route whatever you pay them to route. Moreover, there is no technical reason I can think of to require a /24 as the minimum TRANSFERRABLE size.  If two parties wish to exchange smaller prefixes, I cannot see a technical motivation for ARIN policy to prohibit such a transaction.

I ask you to support this policy on principle, or educate us why removing the minimum transferrable block size is harmful to the technical operations of the internet.

/david

David R Huberman
Microsoft Corporation
Senior IT/OPS Program Manager (GFS)

-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>] On Behalf Of Owen DeLong
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2014 9:18 AM
To: ARIN-PPML List
Subject: [arin-ppml] 2014-3 Remove 8.2/8.3/8.4 Minimum IPv4 Block Size Requirements

There has not been a lot of feedback on this proposal. It would be nice to have more input from a broader cross-section of the community.

At present, I am leaning towards recommending that we abandon this proposal for lack of support by the community. If you support this action, please speak up. If you support this proposal, then it is vital that you speak up.

Thank you,

Owen

_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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/20140319/599d8c7d/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list