[arin-ppml] ARIN-2025-4: Resource Issuance to Natural Persons -- Request for Feedback

[William Herrin]

On Mon, Jul 14, 2025 at 3:42 PM David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org> wrote:
> the larger question is given ARIN is a geographic monopoly (or, if
> you don’t like the “m”-word, does not overlap service area with any
> other RIR) thereby impacting _all_ potential Internet numbers
> resource consumers in the arbitrarily defined “North American"
> region, was such a restriction justified and approved as a region-wide
> policy rather than by organizational fiat?

Hi David,

That is why, as one member of the Advisory Council, I voted to bring
the natural persons proposal forward to a draft policy.

1. I believe that _WHO_ ARIN serves is a question for the community,
not for ARIN staff. ARIN has been around for a quarter century and has
by necessity made some choices along the way. ARIN's legitimacy as a
bottom-up organization is improved if its handling of natural persons
as registrants undergoes robust debate by the general community.

2. I believe that _WHO_ is qualified for how many IP addresses is the
fundamental question for number policy, making this the appropriate
venue for its consideration (as opposed to the ACSP suggestion
process).

Now we have a draft policy on the table. You can stop fighting that
battle: you won.

The next step is: demonstrate that ARIN's existing solution is
insufficient to meet the need. In light of ARIN staff saying, "Whoa,
this draft is a big problem," I'd like to see somewhere in ARIN's
region that ARIN's preferred solution just doesn't work and I'd like
to learn why not. Specifics. Not generalities.


> As mentioned previously, historically at least (and at 3 other RIRs),
> the RIR’s were tasked with allocating resources to those in region
> who justified the operational need for those resources, not only to
> those who also had some form of governmental registration/approval.

Historically speaking:

The 1993 InterNIC didn't care. You wrote something on a form and they
only checked anything if you were asking for a lot of IP addresses.
[source: my interaction]

The 1996 InterNIC still didn't much care. [source: my interaction]

The 2008 ARIN didn't want to register natural persons but could be
talked into it if you were persistent. [source: my interaction]

The 2012 ARIN didn't accept natural persons or sole proprietorships
that did not have associated government paperwork such as a fictitious
name registration [source: second hand]

The 2023 ARIN accepted sole proprietorships where claimed with no more
paperwork than required by the registrant's jurisdiction, often none.
[source: my interaction]

Today's ARIN still accepts sole proprietorships where the claim aligns
with the registrant's jurisdictional requirements. Often this requires
no more than adding the words "sole proprietorship" after your legal
name. [source: staff]


Regards,
Bill Herrin


--
William Herrin
bill at herrin.us
https://bill.herrin.us/