[arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 167, Issue 80

Fernando Frediani fhfrediani at gmail.com
Sun May 12 19:10:14 EDT 2019


I have seen proposals in different RIRs from /23 to /20 and to be honest 
I believe that /22 is fine for newcomers or to a maximum or as a maximum 
an existing one. /23 is way too small and almost useless to most cases. 
Even /22 are not much addresses but enough for someone to exist in the 
Internet and do a proper CGNAT or similar techniques in order to have a 
proper Dual-Stack.

Anything that comes back into the pool should always favor newcomers or 
those who haven't reached a /22 yet. To be honest I don't see much sense 
for a newcomer ISP not to receive a /22 straight upon first request. 
Being an ISP is already justification to receive a /22.

Anything beyond that should happen via transfers for existing members.

Fernando

On 12/05/2019 15:16, Michael Williams wrote:
> I’m fine increasing the wait list time with a larger size allocation 
> such as a /21.
>
> Michael
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 12 May 2019, at 14:10, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu 
> <mailto:farmer at umn.edu>> wrote:
>
>> With the current policy, as proposed by the AC's response, as long as 
>> you have less than a total of three /22s or less direct resources, 
>> you could get up to two additional /22s but not a /21 all at once. 
>> Note if you have no direct resources at all, you can get up to 5 /22s 
>> over a time of at least a year and a quarter plus the wait time on 
>> the list.
>>
>> Smaller blocks over time seem fairer as it allows more entities a bit 
>> at the apple. We could allow /21s instead of /22s but then we should 
>> probably extend the time before you can get back on the list to 6 months.
>>
>> it would be good to hear from more people on these issues.
>>
>> On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 10:55 AM Christian Lefrançois 
>> <clefranc at diffusionfermont.ca <mailto:clefranc at diffusionfermont.ca>> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi all,
>>     I agree with Michael Williams, I'm in the same situation, and on
>>     the waiting
>>     list for more than a year. I need a /21, to finally be free of
>>     upstream
>>     providers fees for IPv4 addresses (lease). I'll gladly give back all
>>     resources to ARIN in the eventuality of end of business, or if I
>>     can manage
>>     to switch completely to IPv6. Not interested with the IPv4 black
>>     market.
>>
>>     I'm in charge of a very small coop cable operator, my market is
>>     about 1900
>>     customers, we're hooking members as fast as possible, will reach (and
>>     surpass) /22 in a few months. So, in my perspective, /21 should
>>     be the
>>     maximum.
>>
>>     Christian Lefrançois
>>     Diffusion Fermont
>>
>>     -----Message d'origine-----
>>     De : ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net
>>     <mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>> De la part de
>>     arin-ppml-request at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml-request at arin.net>
>>     Envoyé : 10 mai 2019 18:33
>>     À : arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>
>>     Objet : ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 167, Issue 80
>>
>>     Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to
>>     arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>
>>
>>     To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>     https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>     or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>     arin-ppml-request at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml-request at arin.net>
>>
>>     You can reach the person managing the list at
>>     arin-ppml-owner at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml-owner at arin.net>
>>
>>     When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
>>     specific than
>>     "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..."
>>
>>
>>     Today's Topics:
>>
>>        1. Re: Fwd: Advisory Council Recommendation Regarding NRPM
>>           4.1.8. Unmet Requests (Scott Leibrand)
>>
>>
>>     ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>     Message: 1
>>     Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 15:32:17 -0700
>>     From: Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:scottleibrand at gmail.com>>
>>     To: Michael Williams <michael.williams at glexia.com
>>     <mailto:michael.williams at glexia.com>>
>>     Cc: Kevin Blumberg <kevinb at thewire.ca
>>     <mailto:kevinb at thewire.ca>>, "arin-ppml at arin.net
>>     <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>"
>>             <arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>>
>>     Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Fwd: Advisory Council Recommendation
>>             Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests
>>     Message-ID:
>>            
>>     <CAGkMwz5Bhp=SLVipZtx=fpu9ni2_uk_L3Tt1=5Lb3x5rNPQJtg at mail.gmail.com
>>     <mailto:5Lb3x5rNPQJtg at mail.gmail.com>>
>>     Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>>     There are organizations of all sizes with direct unmet needs for
>>     address
>>     blocks of all sizes up to /16 or larger.  The waitlist is *not*
>>     intended to
>>     meet all such requests: it simply can't be done, because the free
>>     pool is
>>     empty, and there is way more demand than supply at a price of
>>     ~$0.  Rather,
>>     the waitlist is intended to make sure that returned/reclaimed
>>     addresses are
>>     not stuck at ARIN, but rather distributed in a way that serves a
>>     useful
>>     purpose.
>>
>>     Organizations that need large blocks of address space should be
>>     going to the
>>     market to acquire them, and transferring them to meet their
>>     justified need.
>>     Some organizations that need smaller blocks of addresses, but not
>>     urgently,
>>     can try to get them via the waitlist.  But the more larger
>>     allocations we
>>     allow from reclaimed space, the fewer such organizations can be
>>     served, and
>>     the longer they'll need to wait.  So it makes sense to me to have a
>>     relatively stringent maximum wait list allocation, particularly
>>     since that
>>     also reduces the financial reward to fraudulent actors and/or those
>>     attempting to game the system.
>>
>>     So I support this policy, including the /22 maximum.
>>
>>     -Scott (representing only myself)
>>
>>     On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 3:19 PM Michael Williams <
>>     michael.williams at glexia.com <mailto:michael.williams at glexia.com>>
>>     wrote:
>>
>>     > Representing ARIN member organisation GLEXI-3 *I do not
>>     support* the
>>     > policy as written. Maximum wait list allocation should be at
>>     least a /21.
>>     > We have a direct unmet need for a /21 right now.
>>     >
>>     > My argument is if an organisation receives an allocation from
>>     the wait
>>     > list they should have to return that allocation directly to
>>     ARIN if
>>     > not used. There should be no organisation to organisation transfer
>>     > allowed for IP allocations received from the wait list. That?d
>>     > eliminate all these crazy /16 allocation sales that we see now.
>>     >
>>     > Regards,
>>     >
>>     > Michael
>>     >
>>     > Sent from my iPhone
>>     >
>>     > On 10 May 2019, at 17:36, Kevin Blumberg <kevinb at thewire.ca
>>     <mailto:kevinb at thewire.ca>> wrote:
>>     >
>>     > David,
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > I would rather see a limit or delay on the number of times an
>>     > organization can go back to the waitlist than prevent
>>     organizations
>>     > from getting any space from the wait list.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Would I be more supportive if the number was larger? I don?t
>>     believe
>>     > that is the right control mechanism, so no.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Limiting the size to a /22 was a way of distributing fairly to
>>     as many
>>     > organizations as possible and limiting the abuse vector.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Thanks,
>>     >
>>     > Kevin
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > *From:* ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net
>>     <mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>> *On Behalf Of *David
>>     > Farmer
>>     > *Sent:* Friday, May 10, 2019 4:44 PM
>>     > *To:* Tom Pruitt <tpruitt at stratusnet.com
>>     <mailto:tpruitt at stratusnet.com>>
>>     > *Cc:* arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>
>>     > *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Fwd: Advisory Council Recommendation
>>     > Regarding NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > If /20 is too small is their another size you would propose? a
>>     /19 or
>>     > a
>>     > /18 maybe? Do you have an argument for why that is the right
>>     number?
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > When the AC looked at this there was strong support for
>>     limiting the
>>     > size of the organization that could qualify to ensure these
>>     resources
>>     > went to smaller organizations. But there were varying opinions
>>     on what
>>     > that size should be, /20 was just the option with the most
>>     support amongst
>>     the AC.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > This formulation also provides a limit on how many times an
>>     > organization can go back to the waiting list, allowing smaller
>>     > organizations more times to return to the waiting list, while
>>     limiting
>>     > lager organization to fewer times to return to the waiting
>>     list.  And
>>     > organizations that already have more than a /20 must go to the
>>     market.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > A /20 limit, gives a new organization (with no resources) the
>>     > opportunity receive up to 5 allocations from the waiting list
>>     if they
>>     > got a /22 each time.
>>     >
>>     > A /19 limit would allow a new ISP up to 9 allocations if they
>>     got a
>>     > /22 each time.
>>     >
>>     > A /18 limit would allow a new ISP up to 17 allocations if they
>>     got a
>>     > /22 each time.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Please realize the waiting list is primarily a mechanism to ensure
>>     > resources are not stuck at ARIN, it should not be seen as a
>>     reliable
>>     > means of obtaining resources.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Thanks
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 2:45 PM Tom Pruitt
>>     <tpruitt at stratusnet.com <mailto:tpruitt at stratusnet.com>> wrote:
>>     >
>>     > I do not support the new text, specifically the limit of a /20 per
>>     > organization.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > The limiting of an organization to an aggregate of a /20 is a huge
>>     > hinderance of the ability of a smaller ISP to compete.  A
>>     smaller ISP
>>     > that can win business on service and cost could lose that same
>>     business
>>     due to
>>     > simply recouping the IPv4 costs.   Large ISPs will often give
>>     the IPs away
>>     > to win the business, and it costs them nothing as they received
>>     their IPV4
>>     > space for free.   Additionally, many smaller ISPs operate in
>>     outlying
>>     areas
>>     > where IPv6 adoption will likely be slow, which will also hinder
>>     their
>>     > ability to push IPv6.    I?m not sure at what point an organization
>>     becomes
>>     > ?large?, but the smaller organizations are the ones that will
>>     be hurt
>>     > by this limit.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > What happens to organizations that are currently on the wait
>>     list that
>>     > have an aggregate of a /20 or more?  Do they still get  a /22. 
>>     Some of
>>     > those organizations have been on the list for over a year. 
>>      Assuming they
>>     > played by the rules and made decisions based on the assumption
>>     that
>>     > they would get an allotment of IPv4 addresses, denying them any
>>     > addresses after they have waited a year or more could be very
>>     > detrimental to them. These policy changes and decisions affect the
>>     > smaller entities greatly, and they need some clarity.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Thanks,
>>     >
>>     > Tom Pruitt
>>     >
>>     > Network Engineer
>>     >
>>     > Stratus Networks
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > <image002.png>
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > *From:* ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net
>>     <mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>> *On Behalf Of *Andrew
>>     > Dul
>>     > *Sent:* Monday, May 6, 2019 4:09 PM
>>     > *To:* arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>
>>     > *Subject:* [arin-ppml] Fwd: Advisory Council Recommendation
>>     Regarding
>>     > NRPM 4.1.8. Unmet Requests
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Hello,
>>     >
>>     > I'd like to bring your attention to another issue that may have
>>     been
>>     > lost in the flurry of other emails.  We are currently in a 14 day
>>     > feedback period for the AC's response to the Board's suspension
>>     of the
>>     wait-list.
>>     > Please note the following updated text for the wait-list.  Your
>>     > comments on this updated text are welcome.
>>     >
>>     > Thanks,
>>     >
>>     > Andrew
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > ===
>>     >
>>     > If no such block is available, the organization will be
>>     provided the
>>     > option to be placed on a waiting list of pre-qualified recipients,
>>     > listing both the block size, for which the organization is
>>     qualified,
>>     > which in the case of the waiting list shall not be larger than
>>     a /22,
>>     > and the smallest block size acceptable to the organization. An
>>     > organization may not be added to the waiting list if it already
>>     holds
>>     > IPv4 resources amounting in aggregate to more than a /20 of
>>     address
>>     > space. Resources received via section 4.1.8 may not be
>>     transferred within
>>     60 months of the issuance date.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>     >
>>     > *Subject: *
>>     >
>>     > [arin-ppml] Advisory Council Recommendation Regarding NRPM 4.1.8.
>>     > Unmet Requests
>>     >
>>     > *Date: *
>>     >
>>     > Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:16:31 -0400
>>     >
>>     > *From: *
>>     >
>>     > ARIN <info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net>> <info at arin.net
>>     <mailto:info at arin.net>>
>>     >
>>     > *To: *
>>     >
>>     > arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Subject:
>>     >
>>     > At their 16 January Meeting, the Board of Trustees suspended
>>     issuance
>>     > of number resources under NRPM section 4.1.8.2. (Fulfilling Unmet
>>     > Needs), and referred NRPM section 4.1.8 to the ARIN Advisory
>>     Council
>>     > for their recommendation.
>>     >
>>     > The Advisory Council has provided its recommendation, and per
>>     ARIN's
>>     > Policy Development Process, the recommendation is hereby
>>     submitted to
>>     > the Public Policy Mailing List for a community discussion
>>     period of 14
>>     > days, to conclude on 13 May.
>>     >
>>     > Once completed, the Board of Trustees will review the AC?s
>>     > recommendation and the PPML discussion.
>>     >
>>     > The full text of the Advisory Council's recommendation is below.
>>     >
>>     > Board of Trustees meeting minutes are available at:
>>     >
>>     > https://www.arin.net/about/welcome/board/meetings/2019_0116/
>>     >
>>     > For more details on the Policy Development Process, visit:
>>     >
>>     > https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/pdp/
>>     >
>>     > Regards,
>>     >
>>     > Sean Hopkins
>>     > Policy Analyst
>>     > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > Advisory Council recommendation:
>>     >
>>     > In accordance with section 10.2 of the ARIN Policy Development
>>     > Process, the ARIN Advisory Council recommends the following
>>     actions to
>>     > the Board of Trustees in response to the Board?s suspension of
>>     part of
>>     > the operation of sections 4.1.8, 4.1.8.1 and 4.1.8.2 of the
>>     Numbering
>>     Resource Policy Manual:
>>     >
>>     > Replace section 4.1.8 as follows, then reinstate the full
>>     operation of
>>     > sections 4.1.8, 4.1.8.1 and 4.1.8.2 immediately.
>>     >
>>     > 4.1.8. Unmet Requests
>>     >
>>     > In the event that ARIN does not have a contiguous block of
>>     addresses
>>     > of sufficient size to fulfill a qualified request, ARIN will
>>     provide
>>     > the requesting organization with the option to specify the
>>     smallest
>>     > block size they?d be willing to accept, equal to or larger than
>>     the
>>     > applicable minimum size specified elsewhere in ARIN policy. If
>>     such a
>>     > smaller block is available, ARIN will fulfill the request with the
>>     > largest single block available that fulfills the request.
>>     >
>>     > If no such block is available, the organization will be
>>     provided the
>>     > option to be placed on a waiting list of pre-qualified recipients,
>>     > listing both the block size, for which the organization is
>>     qualified,
>>     > which in the case of the waiting list shall not be larger than
>>     a /22,
>>     > and the smallest block size acceptable to the organization. An
>>     > organization may not be added to the waiting list if it already
>>     holds
>>     > IPv4 resources amounting in aggregate to more than a /20 of
>>     address
>>     > space. Resources received via section 4.1.8 may not be
>>     transferred within
>>     60 months of the issuance date.
>>     >
>>     > Repeated requests, in a manner that would circumvent 4.1.6, are not
>>     > allowed: an organization may only receive one allocation,
>>     assignment,
>>     > or transfer every 3 months, but ARIN, at its sole discretion, may
>>     > waive this requirement if the requester can document a change in
>>     > circumstances since their last request that could not have been
>>     > reasonably foreseen at the time of the original request, and
>>     which now
>>     justifies additional space.
>>     > Qualified requesters whose request cannot be immediately met
>>     will also
>>     > be advised of the availability of the transfer mechanism in
>>     section
>>     > 8.3 as an alternative mechanism to obtain IPv4 addresses.
>>     > _______________________________________________
>>     > ARIN-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:
>>     > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>     > Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you
>>     experience any issues.
>>     >
>>     > _______________________________________________
>>     > ARIN-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:
>>     > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>     > Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you
>>     experience any issues.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > --
>>     >
>>     > ===============================================
>>     > David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu <mailto:Email%3Afarmer at umn.edu>
>>     > Networking & Telecommunication Services Office of Information
>>     > Technology University of Minnesota
>>     > 2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
>>     > Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
>>     > ===============================================
>>     >
>>     > _______________________________________________
>>     > ARIN-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:
>>     > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>     > Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you
>>     experience any issues.
>>     >
>>     > _______________________________________________
>>     > ARIN-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:
>>     > https://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/20190510/fd735392/at
>>     tachment.html
>>     <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190510/fd735392/attachment.html>>
>>
>>     ------------------------------
>>
>>     Subject: Digest Footer
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     ARIN-PPML mailing list
>>     ARIN-PPML at arin.net <mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>
>>     https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>
>>
>>     ------------------------------
>>
>>     End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 167, Issue 80
>>     ******************************************
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     ARIN-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:
>>     https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>     Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you
>>     experience any issues.
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> ===============================================
>> David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu <mailto:Email%3Afarmer at umn.edu>
>> Networking & Telecommunication Services
>> Office of Information Technology
>> University of Minnesota
>> 2218 University Ave SE        Phone: 612-626-0815
>> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
>> ===============================================
>> _______________________________________________
>> ARIN-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:
>> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience 
>> any issues.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20190512/a182db71/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list