Things that need to be addressed

[Alec H. Peterson]

Steve Pierce wrote:
> 
> Here is a problem to consider. More and more hosts are doing what I call
> super-hosting. That is 20,000+ domains on a cluster with one public IP
> address but they will need unique routable addresses for the cluster for
> management. Not a problem, 10 to 15 IP address can handle the whole cluster
> and this is exactly the sort of resource conservation we are looking for
> when it comes to IP addresses.
> 
> The problem is if just one of those 20,000 domains will do something stupid
> to either get themselves banned on MAPS/ORBS or pop up on a net-nanny filter
> or some other block it kills it for everyone else. Often times the blocks
> are on the IP address not on the domain name. So the entire cluster ends up
> getting banned. So the ISP immediately fires the customer and shuts the site
> down but they are left with the wreckage. So then the ISP spends months
> trying to get off the list and many times is unsuccessful from getting the
> filters and blocks entirely removed.

It is my opinion that we should only base our allocation policies on
technical issues relating to IP address and announcement consumption.  There
is no reason in the world why ARIN should be forced to modify its allocation
policies based on the way certain entities decide to do business.  However,
I do acknowledge it is an issue, so I feel we should consider devising an
appropriate policy, and then figure out what issues could arise (ORBS/MAPS,
net nanny, etc).  Then, we can contact the entities which operate those
services and let them know that they will potentially be blocking access to
valid web sites.

Sound like a plan?

Alec

-- 
Alec H. Peterson - ahp at hilander.com
Staff Scientist
CenterGate Research Group - http://www.centergate.com
"Technology so advanced, even _we_ don't understand it!"