[arin-ppml] 2014-1 Out of Region Use
owen at delong.com
Wed Oct 22 17:59:42 EDT 2014
> On Oct 22, 2014, at 2:38 PM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:16 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>> On Oct 22, 2014, at 3:49 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> "ARIN reserves the right to request a listing of all the applicant's
>>>>> number holdings in the region(s) of proposed use"
>>>> I feel it should be eliminated. As it was mentioned at the microphone
>>>> in the Baltimore meeting, ARIN isn't consistent in applications of
>>>> language like and appear to be widely abused. ARIN already has
>>>> Section 12. Why is that not good enough?
>>> I agree with Marty here. We could eliminate that, if you all think Section 12 is enough.
>> Milton -
>> Note that NRPM Section 12 provides only that "ARIN may review the current usage
>> of any resources maintained in the ARIN database." - it would not appear that
>> this language provides ARIN the ability to request information and utilization
>> on resources held in other regions, as envisioned by the present 2014-1 draft
>> policy text.
>> If you wish to drop the language pertaining to obtaining a list of applicants
>> number resources and rely on NRPM 12 for this purpose instead, then it would
>> appear necessary to revise NRPM 12's scope to cover resources held outside of
>> the region. This community may want to carefully consider the merits and
>> issues with each potential approach before deciding one way or the other.
> Not sure why ARIN needs to know what other RIR resources are in use by
> a company or what their utilization rate is beyond the public whois
> database(s). If I'm in compliance with the other RIR's policies its
> none of ARINs business outside of how I am using _their_ resources.
> Section 12 should be more than adequate for their needs*.
When we are allowing out-of-region usage, there is a desire to verify
that organizations aren’t “double-dipping” and getting numbers from
more than one RIR for the same address need.
> This also continues to contain broken language with respect to
> internet operational realities.
> Why should ARIN dictate what facilities and services I can and can't
> use to justify resources? Ex: "The services and facilities used to
> justify the need for ARIN resources that will be used out of region
> cannot also be used to justify resource requests from another RIR.”
Again, the intent here isn’t to dictate what you can and can’t use to
justify resources, but, to at least make a good faith effort at indicating
that you’re not supposed to use the need for 1,000 addresses to get
5,000 addresses, 1,000 from each RIR. If you want to get 200 addresses
from each RIR, no problem, or however else you want to mix and match
> How will they even know? I don't give the other RIRs permission to
> share data and I don't give them permission to share data. I also have
> facilities and services (data centers, circuits, etc) that use ARIN
> resources along side with RIPE/APNIC/etc resources. This work is
> technically unsound.
I don’t think there is an intent to avoid the utilization you have or in any
way prohibit that. The intent is to avoid double-dipping from two RIRs for
the exact same need.
More information about the ARIN-PPML