<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<base href="x-msg://5920/"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">So then the logical question that I would ask is: As a matter of current policy and practice does Arin first require an organization that requests say a /17
to request one first from a larger say /12 upstream before Arin will allocate the block, or maybe a /14 from an upstream /8, or /whatever from a larger upstream /whatever? What if the larger upstream refuses the smaller organization the requested size block?
Does Arin require larger allocation holders to honor smaller allocation requests as a condition of their allocation? What about an organization who runs BGP and needs an independent block but their upstream doesn’t want to permanently give them what they
consider a large portion of their own assigned block because it is somewhat difficult for them to get more resources from Arin?
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">And most importantly if this is current policy, does Arin actually enforce it every time for every organization no matter what their size or the size of their
request? If not then fair is fair and everyone should be treated equally albeit adjusted for their size and the size of their request.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> John Curran [mailto:jcurran@arin.net]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, April 30, 2013 11:04 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Steven Ryerse<br>
<b>Cc:</b> ARIN-PPML List<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [arin-ppml] Clean up definition of LIR/ISP vs. end-user<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Apr 30, 2013, at 9:45 PM, Steven Ryerse <<a href="mailto:SRyerse@eclipse-networks.com">SRyerse@eclipse-networks.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It means that allocations should be made by a combination of the size of the organization and the size of their network and maybe the total size of their current
allocations. There should</span> <i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">never</span></i> <span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">be a time when the allocation by Arin is zero.
Arin’s mission is to allocate - and it isn’t to not allocate.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">We run a small data center and we run BGP and should easily be able to qualify for a /22 (which I believe is the current minimum block size Arin allocates per
current policy) and maybe even qualify for a /21. ... We were denied a /22 allocation – the minimum size this “community” has decided to allocate - because of “policy” </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is why it is important to remember that such a practice originated even before <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">ARIN's formation, and it is not about conservation of address space as much as it <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">is about encouraging routing aggregation by making use of hierarchical addressing <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">(as described in the following text from RFC 2050, November 1996) - <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">" ISPs who exchange routing information with other ISPs at multiple
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> locations and operate without default routing may request space<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> directly from the regional registry in its geographical area. ...<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> To facilitate hierarchical addressing, implemented using Classless<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR), all other ISPs should request address<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> space directly from its upstream provider. "<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Whether such a practice is still relevant certainly should be discussed by the community, <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">but encouraging use of address space from the upstream provider has been fundamental <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">principle of the Internet Registry System since inception. ARIN reflects this for IPv4 <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">in NRPM 4.1.1 (General Principles/Routability) and in the initial ISP allocation policy.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">FYI,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">/John<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">John Curran<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">President and CEO<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">ARIN<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>