[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-4: Allow Inter-regional IPv6 Resource Transfers

Adam Thompson athompson at merlin.mb.ca
Wed Apr 10 18:34:41 EDT 2019

(Still waaaaay OT, sorry… all numbers are estimates and/or from memory, YMMV)

In my experience, Canada does have it better, but not by much.  In high-density urban locales (>75% of Canadian pop. IIRC), over 80% of the population has a choice of two (2) carriers: the incumbent telco, and the incumbent cableco.  Outside high-density urban, telco DSL has moderate reach (~50%, maybe?) and we have a lot of WISPs, but generally non-overlapping.
Businesses typically only have one choice for “business-grade” service (the ILEC); at best, 25% of urban businesses are serviced by cablecos or CLECs, at least in my part of the country, and roughly 0% of non-urban businesses get cableco service.

Anyone who claims there’s healthy ISP competition in Canada needs to leave Vancouver or Toronto (roughly, L.A. or New York).  I’m saying that as the 2nd-largest ISP in my province (state).
There’s a good reason, however for this state of affairs: 1/10th the pop. of the USA, but filling slightly more square miles[1], makes it hard to profitably run fiber or copper everywhere, and even WISPs are challenged by distance.

I don’t believe ARIN’s mandate extends to ensuring competition exists in any particular local market.  In Canada that’s the prerogative of various gov’t agencies, charter corps (“creatures of statute” in the US), and NGOs.  So even if ARIN were inclined to do so, it’s certainly not something that we’d formally recognize as being their responsibility.

I do not expect, or intend, to ever participate in ARIN’s RPKI system under its current T&Cs.  As MERLIN is a Special Operating Agency of the provincial gov’t, there is literally no human being in existence with the authority to sign the RPKI agreement as-is for me, and ennobling a single American corporation to attest to the validity of my <anything> would, in my interpretation, definitely not be consistent with the current government’s aggressive stance towards provincial and regional self-sufficiency and self-determination.  Yet since I’m firmly in the ARIN region because of a US-centric decision several decades ago, I can’t go registry-shopping.  Which means I’ll publish IRR objects, sure, but RPKI will remain vaporware, for both usage modes.

I didn’t realize it was time for the annual RPKI T&C bashing yet… :-/


[1] Yes, I know most of those square miles are uninhabitable.  The overall point remains valid – go look at a Canadian population density map if you don’t believe me.

Adam Thompson
Consultant, Infrastructure Services
100 - 135 Innovation Drive
Winnipeg, MB, R3T 6A8
(204) 977-6824 or 1-800-430-6404 (MB only)
athompson at merlin.mb.ca<mailto:athompson at merlin.mb.ca>

From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of Jo Rhett
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 12:54 PM
To: John Curran <jcurran at arin.net>
Cc: arin-ppml <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-4: Allow Inter-regional IPv6 Resource Transfers

(off topic)
> customers have autonomy in selection of their service providers

ha ha haah=ahaaahahahahah oh wow.  *MAYBE* in the commercial space. I surveyed all of my friends and family at one point and got over 800+ replies all across the US, and only 4-- FOUR == a small fraction of a percent!! -- had a choice of providers for at least 10+Mb/sec internet service.
Maybe Canada has it better, but I haven't heard that the Caribbean has significant choice either. Mexico has the same non-overlap in the market as the US.
On topic for ARIN but not for African ISPs: I don't think that ARIN policy should revolve around Republican beliefs that the market always provides competition. History shows that the market will choose not to compete whenever possible, and will even strike agreements not to compete. Thus ARIN has a responsibility IMHO to ensure that customers receive baseline services -- to whatever extent it is possible within ARIN's charter.

On Tue, Apr 9, 2019 at 6:44 AM John Curran <jcurran at arin.net<mailto:jcurran at arin.net>> wrote:
On 9 Apr 2019, at 9:33 AM, Job Snijders <job at ntt.net<mailto:job at ntt.net>> wrote:

I'd like to draw the community's attention to the following joint
announcement from two of Africa's largest IP transit providers.
It should be incontestable now that ARIN resource holders are at a
disadvantage when it comes to RPKI services.

Job -

Indeed.  It’s similarly incontestable that customers of those service providers are at a disadvantage to customers of other service provider in Africa that do provide complete routing validation including for ARIN-region resource holders.   One of the benefits of our loosely coordinated Internet is that service providers have autonomy in how they run their network, and customers have autonomy in selection of their service providers.


John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers

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:
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.

Jo Rhett
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190410/2530c41f/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2381 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190410/2530c41f/attachment-0002.png>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list