[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2023-3: Amendment of the waitlist
Dustin Moses
dmoses at intermaxteam.com
Wed Jun 21 12:51:55 EDT 2023
There is no definition for lease or leased IPs anywhere in the NRPM. This is getting into the same jargonized problem as before. IF ARIN was to define leasing IPs, then there is an expectation legally that leasing IPs is an "acceptable use" of number resources unless more policy explicitly denies leasing. However, the policy manual as it is now is intentionally vague enough to not argue for or deny leasing IP addresses as an acceptable utilization of resources. Additionally, as an SP, what does a lease look like?
I understand this is opening up the proverbial can of worms, but I don't believe these statements can be mutually exclusive.
Dustin Moses
Network Engineer II
o: 208-762-8065 d: (208) 758-0489
w: intermaxnetworks.com
a: 7400 N Mineral Drive Suite 300, Coeur d'Alene, ID
83815
-----Original Message-----
From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of arin-ppml-request at arin.net
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2023 6:16 AM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 216, Issue 35
Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to
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
You can reach the person managing the list at
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: Draft Policy ARIN-2023-3: Amendment of the waitlist
agreement to include a restriction on leasing (Owen DeLong)
2. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2023-3: Amendment of the waitlist
agreement to include a restriction on leasing (Ron Grant)
3. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2023-3: Amendment of the waitlist
agreement to include a restriction on leasing (William Herrin)
4. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2: /26 initial IPv4 allocation for
IXPs (Matt Peterson)
5. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2: /26 initial IPv4 allocation for
IXPs (Bill Woodcock)
6. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2: /26 initial IPv4 allocation for
IXPs (David Farmer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 21:44:58 -0700
From: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
To: William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2023-3: Amendment of the
waitlist agreement to include a restriction on leasing
Message-ID: <79BF00CF-E7BC-471F-A234-F77E1BEECCCD at delong.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
What if the registrant issues the addresses to downstream BGP customers?
Owen
> On Jun 20, 2023, at 15:16, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 8:54?AM ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>> Address space distributed from the waitlist will not be eligible for lease or transfer, with the exception of Section 8.2 transfers, for a period of 60 months.
>
> Fuzzy language. What is leasing? Suggest something more like:
>
> "If announced on the public Internet, address space distributed from
> the waitlist shall be announced only by the direct ARIN registrant
> until 60 months after receipt."
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
> --
> William Herrin
> bill at herrin.us
> https://bill.herrin.us/
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 22:26:12 -0700
From: Ron Grant <ron+arin-ppml at balansoft.com>
To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2023-3: Amendment of the
waitlist agreement to include a restriction on leasing
Message-ID: <eb2d9e3b-9e31-4c3f-c90e-a7c0a206eba4 at balansoft.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
That's not a lease, in the sense that's of concern. "Downstream" implies a connection. Let's call that "rent".
ISPs "rent" IP blocks all the time - even for their own customers.
$10/mo for a static IP address instead of a DHCP assigned one - a practice as old as the hills.
And business-based Internet is almost always a statically assigned CIDR subnet - for example one client of mine assigns a /29 for free, and charges an additional $1/ip for larger networks. That's rent. (ya I know, IANAL and the acronym speaks volumes)
Seems to me the thing that's got everyone tied in a knot is the idea of allowing someone to lease out a wait-listed network to someone with whom YOU HAVE NO OTHER BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP.
How to define that? Maybe "arm's length".....
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/arm%27s_length#:~:text=?Arm%27s%20length?%20is%20an%20expression,and%20in%20their%20self%2Dinterest.
On 2023-06-20 9:44 p.m., Owen DeLong via ARIN-PPML wrote:
> What if the registrant issues the addresses to downstream BGP customers?
>
> Owen
>
>
>> On Jun 20, 2023, at 15:16, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 8:54?AM ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>>> Address space distributed from the waitlist will not be eligible for lease or transfer, with the exception of Section 8.2 transfers, for a period of 60 months.
>> Fuzzy language. What is leasing? Suggest something more like:
>>
>> "If announced on the public Internet, address space distributed from
>> the waitlist shall be announced only by the direct ARIN registrant
>> until 60 months after receipt."
>>
>> Regards,
>> Bill Herrin
>>
>> --
>> William Herrin
>> bill at herrin.us
>> https://bill.herrin.us/
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
--
Ron Grant
Balan Software/Networks
Network Architecture & Programming
604-737-2113
ca.linkedin.com/in/obiron
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2023 23:16:46 -0700
From: William Herrin <bill at herrin.us>
To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2023-3: Amendment of the
waitlist agreement to include a restriction on leasing
Message-ID:
<CAP-guGW-cyx0hJEugGu0dpuph9F1qkrgO+CXhzLLnpYaKjsjgQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 9:45?PM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> What if the registrant issues the addresses to downstream BGP customers?
They sat through the waitlist for years, not buying addresses at market since that would have kicked them off the waitlist, and then when they finally got their, what, /22 or so, they decided to use them for a downstream BGP customer?
Pull the other one.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--
William Herrin
bill at herrin.us
https://bill.herrin.us/
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 01:18:55 -0700
From: Matt Peterson <matt at peterson.org>
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2: /26 initial IPv4
allocation for IXPs
Message-ID:
<CAFN0R27ach9zuLrPufDsx-kbXGfd=EyTpZuOVriieGg3mmPhsQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
It's clear this proposal did not receive feedback from those of us
who operate IXP's *(or those who lived through the ep.net <http://ep.net>
era).* Renumbering events are often multi-year efforts for an IXP, this
"savings" is not worth the operational overhead. I'm not in support of this
proposal. This is a solution looking for a problem, we have both the
appropriate pool size and a method to refill.
If anything, the 4.4 requirement language around *"other participants
(minimum of three total)" *could use some attention. ARIN's service region
has many "shadow IXP's", which may have 3 unique ASN's *(say a route
server, route collector, and management network) *- but are all operated by
the same organization. That does not seem like a legitimate definition of
an exchange point, especially when that operator is the only participant
over several years.
--Matt
On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 8:54?AM ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
> On 15 June 2023, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted ?ARIN-prop-320:
> /26 initial IPv4 allocation for IXPs? as a Draft Policy.
>
> Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2 is below and can be found at:
>
> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2023_2
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20230621/f272018f/attachment-0001.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 12:54:03 +0200
From: Bill Woodcock <woody at pch.net>
To: Douglas Haber via ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2: /26 initial IPv4
allocation for IXPs
Message-ID: <D4C6F56A-3B02-468B-B317-0383FBD93E5B at pch.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> On Jun 21, 2023, at 10:18 AM, Matt Peterson <matt at peterson.org> wrote:
> It's clear this proposal did not receive feedback from those of us who operate IXP's (or those who lived through the ep.net era). Renumbering events are often multi-year efforts for an IXP, this "savings" is not worth the operational overhead. I'm not in support of this proposal. This is a solution looking for a problem, we have both the appropriate pool size and a method to refill.
> If anything, the 4.4 requirement language around "other participants (minimum of three total)" could use some attention. ARIN's service region has many "shadow IXP's", which may have 3 unique ASN's (say a route server, route collector, and management network) - but are all operated by the same organization. That does not seem like a legitimate definition of an exchange point, especially when that operator is the only participant over several years.
I would just chime in to say that I definitely agree with the first of Matt?s points. IXPs rarely know how long it will be until they need a larger address space, and when they do, it?s typically too late to renumber hundreds of different organizations. This policy would create a vast amount of unnecessary work for ARIN members, while yielding no obvious benefit to anyone.
As regards what constitutes a ?real? IXP, that?s a tougher question. While Matt is undoubtedly correct that Andrew?s Basement Exchange, the canonical example, may not have three unrelated participants at the time they apply, that?s also true, at the outset, of many IXPs which follow a sure-footed path to success. And it?s not possible to know in advance, in any sort of replicable policy way, which will ultimately succeed, and which fail. I guess my thought on this is to be liberal in distributing, and also relatively quick to reclaim when an IXP goes defunct. Over the last 31 years, 34% of all IXPs that were established, went defunct. Many took years or decades to fail, but once they have, there?s no reason for those allocations to persist. Most IXPs are one-off, a group of ISPs who get together to form an IXP in a specific location. A few consist of a single organization spanning multiple unconnected locations? When those organizations are for-profit startups, I guess I woul
d evaluate their claims carefully, and do a slow-start, rather than allowing them to use the policy to get a /24 for every new claimed location, in advance of proving themselves.
-Bill
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2023 08:15:47 -0500
From: David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu>
To: Matt Peterson <matt at peterson.org>
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2: /26 initial IPv4
allocation for IXPs
Message-ID:
<CAN-Dau1HsnbqA=j3jNQkmSHaSTsLNu0Sj1JiSFnbWj8mO=HOug at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Actually, I expect the genesis of this proposal was the very similar
proposal in the RIPE community RIPE-2023-02 Reducing IXP IPv4 assignment
default size to a /26. That proposal followed a presentation at RIPE 86
last fall and a discussion on their address-policy-wg mailing late last
year. The conversation started with a reduction to /29, and a reasonable
compromise of /26 that was written in to a formal proposal earlier this
year. That proposal is progressing through their process and just finished
their Discussion Phase last week, and has entered their Review Phase, and
at least seems to be heading towards being policy in the RIPE community.
While I do not support this proposal, especially as written, it is
nevertheless an important and timely conversation for the ARIN community to
have and I for one appreciate it being brought forward to our community as
a proposal.
Thanks.
On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 03:19 Matt Peterson <matt at peterson.org> wrote:
> It's clear this proposal did not receive feedback from those of us
> who operate IXP's *(or those who lived through the ep.net <http://ep.net>
> era).* Renumbering events are often multi-year efforts for an IXP, this
> "savings" is not worth the operational overhead. I'm not in support of this
> proposal. This is a solution looking for a problem, we have both the
> appropriate pool size and a method to refill.
>
> If anything, the 4.4 requirement language around *"other participants
> (minimum of three total)" *could use some attention. ARIN's service
> region has many "shadow IXP's", which may have 3 unique ASN's *(say a
> route server, route collector, and management network) *- but are all
> operated by the same organization. That does not seem like a legitimate
> definition of an exchange point, especially when that operator is the only
> participant over several years.
>
> --Matt
>
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2023 at 8:54?AM ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>
>> On 15 June 2023, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted ?ARIN-prop-320:
>> /26 initial IPv4 allocation for IXPs? as a Draft Policy.
>>
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2023-2 is below and can be found at:
>>
>> https://www.arin.net/participate/policy/drafts/2023_2
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
--
===============================================
David Farmer Email:farmer 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
===============================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20230621/da859b3f/attachment.htm>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML mailing list
ARIN-PPML at arin.net
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
------------------------------
End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 216, Issue 35
******************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20230621/fbf2cc49/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image600403.png
Type: image/png
Size: 44913 bytes
Desc: image600403.png
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20230621/fbf2cc49/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image328530.png
Type: image/png
Size: 397 bytes
Desc: image328530.png
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20230621/fbf2cc49/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image091328.png
Type: image/png
Size: 324 bytes
Desc: image091328.png
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20230621/fbf2cc49/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image022400.png
Type: image/png
Size: 354 bytes
Desc: image022400.png
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20230621/fbf2cc49/attachment-0003.png>
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list