<div dir="ltr">Would you be interested in submitting a policy proposal to address the issue? If so, just fill out the short template at <a href="https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp_appendix_b.html">https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp_appendix_b.html</a> and submit it to <a href="mailto:policy@arin.net">policy@arin.net</a> (and Cc: <a href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</a> if you want it posted here). I (and likely several other AC members) would also be happy to help if you're unsure about anything.<div>
<br></div><div style>Once you propose a policy change, the AC assigns shepherds to work directly with you, verifies that the topic is in scope and has a clearly defined problem statement / rationale (or works with you to clarify it), and then if it meets those requirements, accepts it as a draft policy to be discussed at an upcoming policy meeting.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>Thanks for participating in improving ARIN's policies. I'm looking forward to hopefully working with you more in the near future.</div><div style><br></div><div style>-Scott</div></div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Tim St. Pierre <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:tim@communicatefreely.net" target="_blank">tim@communicatefreely.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div>Hi Scott,<br>
<br>
Yes, if that clause were added, I would have my allocation by the
end of the week. In fact, in my immediate need application
attempt, I was able to document that I was actively providing
connectivity to over 500 devices.<br>
<br>
The silly thing about requiring the /23 first, is that I have to
somehow find a /23, assign it, then get my /22 and give back the
/23. A lot of nuisance for customers with static assignments and
more work than it ought to be, since I can meet the spirit of the
policy, just not the letter of it.<br>
<br>
Thanks!<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
-Tim</font></span><div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
On 13-04-15 04:17 PM, Scott Leibrand wrote:<br>
</div></div></div><div><div class="h5">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Tim,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think this is an issue that is only going to get
worse as IPv4 exhaustion makes upstream ISPs less willing to
allocate large blocks of addresses to downstream customers.
In such a situation, I think it is entirely appropriate to
allow a downstream ISP, which has a customer base large enough
to justify a /23 (and is allocating those customers
ARIN-assigned IPv6 space) to also get approved for an IPv4
/22, and be eligible to acquire it on the transfer market if
the ARIN free pool is exhausted. I would personally rather
not liberalize 4.2.1.6. Immediate need, as that is supposed to
be for "exceptional" cases, but perhaps adding a clause to the
first bullet point of 4.2.2.2. Multihomed would be
appropriate. Maybe something like "or demonstrate the
assignment of IPv6 addresses to more than 500 devices"?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Would that kind of policy help for a situation
like yours?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Scott</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 9:01 AM, Scott
Leibrand <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:scottleibrand@gmail.com" target="_blank">scottleibrand@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Tim,<br>
<br>
Thanks for bringing this up. It sounds like a real issue,
which could use some policy work. Cross-posting to PPML,
where such policy discussions occur.<br>
<span><font color="#888888"><br>
Scott<br>
</font></span>
<div>
<div><br>
On Apr 15, 2013, at 7:43 AM, "Tim St. Pierre" <<a href="mailto:tim@communicatefreely.net" target="_blank">tim@communicatefreely.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
> Hello,<br>
><br>
> We are a new ISP, and we have had some interesting
dilemma's getting<br>
> started. I'm curious to know if this is something
that has affected<br>
> others, or if I'm just in a strange situation.<br>
><br>
> We are building out an access network to reach
business customers in a<br>
> small town. We will probably never be very big,
but we like are town<br>
> and are hoping to eventually extend our reach to
most business in town.<br>
> When we started, we requested a /32 IPv6 from ARIN.
We had to explain<br>
> what we were doing, and our coverage area, etc.
This seems reasonable<br>
> and all, and eventually we got our /32. At this
point, all we had was a<br>
> /28 IPv4 SWIP'd from an upstream, so our fees
jumped from $0 to $1800<br>
> for the year.<br>
><br>
> Now we have a running network, with real customers,
and we need IPv4<br>
> allocations, since running IPv6 only for retail
Internet is a bit<br>
> problematic. We tried to get a /24 out of our
upstream, but they are<br>
> essentially out of address space and can't give us
any. They can't get<br>
> any more either, because they just got taken over
by a larger carrier<br>
> that has free pools, but on a different AS.<br>
><br>
> We do have another upstream that we could connect
to, but they can't<br>
> give us anything more than a /28 either.<br>
><br>
> I applied for a /22 under the immediate need
category, but I don't<br>
> qualify, since I can really only use about 2/3 of
it within 30 days.<br>
><br>
> So now I'm stuck with a customer base that has
native IPv6 for everyone,<br>
> but only a /29 IPv4 to share between 12 offices and
about 200 or so<br>
> retail WiFi users. I have to do crazy incoming NAT
nonsense to support<br>
> my customers mail servers and VPN devices, and I'm
crossing my fingers<br>
> that the wireless users don't do something stupid
and get us all<br>
> blacklisted.<br>
><br>
> Should there be an additional policy to deal with
initial allocations<br>
> where efficient utilization of X number of IPv6
/64s would serve as<br>
> justification for a /22 IPv4, or perhaps some other
scheme that makes it<br>
> a little easier for new ISPs. I understand that
IPv4 is constrained,<br>
> but we aren't out of them yet, and a small ISP
still needs an allocation<br>
> to function.<br>
><br>
> Another alternative would be a new entrant policy
similar to the<br>
> immediate need clause, but with the following
changes:<br>
> -Only 50% must be used within 30 days<br>
> -ISP must demonstrate that IPv6 has been deployed
to end users<br>
> -The same documentation of customer contracts and
purchased equipment<br>
> would still apply.<br>
><br>
> I look around and see the big incumbents with no
IPv6 to speak of, yet<br>
> they have IPv4 for every customer. Here I am as
the little startup<br>
> trying to make a go of it, but I'm at a serious
disadvantage because I<br>
> can't get any address resources.<br>
><br>
> Am I just terribly unlucky, or is this becoming a
problem for others as<br>
> well? I think the main issue is that upstream
providers aren't able to<br>
> hand out /24s like they used to, so showing a /23
equivalent from an<br>
> upstream is next to impossible now.<br>
><br>
> Thanks!<br>
> -Tim<br>
><br>
> --<br>
> --<br>
> Tim St. Pierre<br>
> System Operator<br>
> Communicate Freely<br>
> <a href="tel:289%20225%201220%20x5101" value="+12892251220" target="_blank">289 225 1220 x5101</a><br>
> <a href="mailto:tim@communicatefreely.net" target="_blank">tim@communicatefreely.net</a><br>
> <a href="http://www.communicatefreely.net" target="_blank">www.communicatefreely.net</a><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> ARIN-Discuss<br>
> You are receiving this message because you are
subscribed to<br>
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (<a href="mailto:ARIN-discuss@arin.net" target="_blank">ARIN-discuss@arin.net</a>).<br>
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list
subscription at:<br>
> <a href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss</a><br>
> Please contact <a href="mailto:info@arin.net" target="_blank">info@arin.net</a> if you
experience any issues.<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre cols="72">--
--
Tim St. Pierre
System Operator
Communicate Freely
<a href="tel:289%20225%201220%20x5101" value="+12892251220" target="_blank">289 225 1220 x5101</a>
<a href="mailto:tim@communicatefreely.net" target="_blank">tim@communicatefreely.net</a>
<a href="http://www.communicatefreely.net" target="_blank">www.communicatefreely.net</a></pre>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>