[arin-ppml] ARIN-2024-5 Rewrite of NRPM Section 4.4 Micro-Allocation - Community Questions

[David Conrad]

On Feb 26, 2025, at 4:12 PM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 3:51 PM David Conrad via ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>> wrote:
>> Tyler,
>> 
>> I’ve been reluctant to comment on this thread, but I’m increasingly confused...
>> 
>> On Feb 26, 2025, at 2:47 PM, Tyler O'Meara via ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml at arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>> wrote:
>> > We should clarify that only the actual authoritative DNS servers qualify as CII;
>> 
>> So, the load balancers, routers, switches, etc., that connect those servers don’t count? The remote database backends the authoritative servers depend on? The other backend and administrative systems, etc.?
> 
> Why would those need publicly routable IPv4 addresses?

If you’re arguing that only public attachment points to the Internet need IPv4 addresses, you’ll get little argument from me, although those who are involved with actual critical infrastructure may have a different opinion. However, my impression was that people were throwing more into the “Critical Internet Infrastructure” bucket, e.g., ARIN and ICANN/PTI.  My question was really the part that you removed:

"The definition of “CII” used here appears to be arbitrary. Perhaps it might help if you define what you think is CII and why ARIN and ICANN/PTI would fall under that definition whereas Verisign wouldn’t?"

Regards,
-drc


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20250227/ea979213/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20250227/ea979213/attachment.sig>