[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2019-2: Waiting List Block Size Restriction

[hostmaster at uneedus.com]

I actually hope that in 10 years that I wont have to be involved much in 
the use of IPv4 addresses at all, and IPv6 will be the king.

While not conserving of IPv4 addresses, the idea of a direct SWIP contact 
for every IP address I would think is the ideal for the abuse fighter. 
One lookup, and you know exactly where the abuse report goes.

If I went for minimal IPv4 use, you would have to send your report to the 
central authority, who would have to look thru logs to determine which 
customer is responsible.  This is a lot slower than a direct SWIP contact.

Of course, if circumstances change, I will consider change as well. 
However most of the changes that would alter our 1 ip per customer policy 
will have to come from Congress, and I do not see that happening anytime 
soon.  For example repeal of DMCA and CALEA would go a long way toward 
considering more IP sharing between clients, but I doubt this ever has a 
chance of happening.

I feel that a business that is mostly automated is the best, and spending 
lots of time on things like DMCA complaints is not where I want to be. 
When we run out of addresses for customers, Ill see where it goes at that 
time.

Albert Erdmann
Network Administrator
Paradise On Line Inc.



On Sat, 2 Mar 2019, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote:

>
> In message <Pine.LNX.4.64.1903021758430.3734 at localhost.localdomain>,
> theone at uneedus.com wrote:
>
>> While you are right that I can have these many sites all on the same IP,
>> the amount of time I would have to spend on central management to do so is
>> grossly greater than the cost of the required customer IP addresses...
>
> So basically, if the cost/benefit ratio were to change in the future,
> in such a way as to make IPv4 addresses more costly or valuable, you
> might possibly change the way that you currently utilize each one of
> those that you have, and you might begin employing a more address-
> efficient set of practices, yes?
>
> My only observation is that this could be either a good thing or a bad
> thing, depending on one's point of view.  For hosting companies reliant
> on essentially unlimited supplies of cheap IPv4 addresses, it would
> quite certainly be a bad thing to be enticed, by rising address costs,
> to use less of them.  For others, inclduing any and all IPv6 cheerleaders,
> it would probably be viewed as a good thing.
>
> For anyone, such as myself, who is concerned primarily with abuse, any
> and all encouragement, economic or otherwise, to convert each and every
> IPv4 address either into "dead space" or into -legitimate- and well managed
> DNS/SMTP/HTTP -servers- would be a profoundly good thing.
>
>
> Regards,
> rfg
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>