[arin-ppml] 2014-1 Out of Region Use

Martin Hannigan hannigan at gmail.com
Wed Oct 22 18:14:44 EDT 2014

*shrug* I thought this was to allow "out of region use". Not to work
around Section 12.



On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> 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
> within reason.
>> 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.
> Owen

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list