<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" 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"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<STYLE>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</STYLE>
<STYLE><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@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:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-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;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US dir=ltr link=blue vLink=purple>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>Dear Kevin,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The needs test has several flaws when operating in the new market
environment.</DIV>
<DIV>It worked okay, not great, for the free-pool environment.</DIV>
<DIV>But now there are forces which were absent from the free pool environment
which are working on network operators.</DIV>
<DIV>These forces will tend towards policy avoidance, and there are several
methods of avoidance which reduce Whois accuracy.</DIV>
<DIV>In addition, the needs test creates an additional barrier for small
entrants such as yourself and absolutely prevents a first allocation via
transfer.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Your attitude seems to be that those problems are acceptable so as to
reduce the likelihood of larger problems inherent to a commodity market.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Could you please provide a scenario in which the passage of one of the
proposals seeking to address the new reality will lead to these larger
problems?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In particular, 2014-14 seeks to address this situation through the limited
removal of needs testing for a /16 or less, once per year per recipient.</DIV>
<DIV>Should that proposal pass, what in your mind would be the downside risk?
Perhaps if we can identify that risk, we can address it.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>For example, there is the fear that nefarious actors would spin up separate
organizations and use them to get around the limits of 2014-14.</DIV>
<DIV>Perhaps there is a way to allow ARIN staff the power to identify and
protect against this through some definition of related organizations?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>For another example, there are many who feel a /16 is not small, and would
provide a great enough opportunity for hoarding by enough separate
organizations that it could affect the overall transfer marketplace. Would
you consider a smaller block size more appropriate to minimize this risk? Owen
has suggested a /20, temporarily.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As ARIN gets to the dregs of the free pool, staff will be busy
team-reviewing every allocation, and there is a long tail of unaggregatable
/24s, more than a thousand. Since every applicant will get only a /24 and be
told to come back in three months, we can easily foresee ARIN staff being very
busy. My reading of policy also finds that in our current Phase IV, team review
has to happen to transfers, too. Maybe John Curran can confirm or deny this? I
could be mistaken.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But if that is indeed the case and ARIN staff is very busy, response times
will decay. ARIN already posted a warning to that effect on their website.
Should this slowdown materialize, is this the kind of support of network
operators you think is ARIN’s proper role? Would you consider a change to
policy which required organizations attest to their need for a small block
rather than involve ARIN staff in review? If so, is there a maximum block size
for which you would accept attestation in lieu of staff review? What about how
much team review of /24s costs the community, as we consider funding, is that a
worthy investment?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I read you as concerned about the impact of the profit motive on the IPv4
allocation process, but surely you understand that the genie is out of the
bottle in that regard, and ARIN will register a block to a needy porn site that
pays more than a needy community workshop? So the needs test does not prevent
those with more money from outbidding those with less. Those with more money
will get the space. What the needs test does is prevent hoarding by those
who seek to buy without need, as we define need. I think that it is incumbent on
you to go beyond lamenting the profit motive and the commodity market as
problematic, and actually provide a scenario which could be damaging to network
operators should a limited removal of needs-testing be implemented.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Finally, as should be expected of every organization, you wish to leverage
the system that exists to your benefit. </DIV>
<DIV>Here is my advice: go to ARIN under immediate need and tell them you plan
to stop the NATTING, then get your /24.</DIV>
<DIV>ARIN does not require you to NAT. In the stewardship community’s expressed
wisdom, conserving addresses in this way reduces your justifiable need for
IPv4.</DIV>
<DIV>Perversely, you are being punished for your conservation, although I am
sure your NAT is functioning perfectly for you.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,<BR>Mike Burns</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=kkargel@polartel.com
href="mailto:kkargel@polartel.com">Kevin Kargel</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, September 23, 2014 11:44 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=arin-ppml@arin.net
href="mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net">arin-ppml@arin.net</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> [arin-ppml] reverse COE statement</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<P class=MsoNormal>I should point out that the strength of my convictions on the
discussion of needs assessment impacts me negatively on a personal level.
I am in a position where I would love to get a /24 for my own use, personally
and business. Unfortunately I would not pass the needs requirement.
I could present about 40 IP addresses that are currently NATed, with some small
future growth projection. That would not – in my understanding – pass
muster for an allocation under the current rules. I will in the near
future be changing locations and providers for that network and a portable IP
block would be most handy.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>I honestly do not believe that eliminating needs tests would
be good for society. <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>If needs tests were eliminated all that would be left in my
way would be the money hurdle, which presents a relatively low bar to
vault. <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Don’t get me wrong, if needs tests are eliminated over my
objections I will be at the front of the line with my application. I see
nothing wrong with legitimately leveraging the system that exists.
<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>I know it would be trivial as a network operator to game the
system for a /24, I just don’t want to do it that way. <o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><IMG id=Picture_x0020_1 alt=Kevin_Kargel
src="cid:26E2286877214CBC847A56481577C796@MPC" width=480
height=120><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </P></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>PPML<BR>You are receiving
this message because you are subscribed to<BR>the ARIN Public Policy Mailing
List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).<BR>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list
subscription at:<BR>http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml<BR>Please
contact info@arin.net if you experience any
issues.</DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>