Independent space from ARIN

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

Some of you *might* remember a rant I posted here several years ago
about getting our first allocation from ARIN...many here suggested that
I call ARIN and get clarification on the allocation (ie, they gave me a
/20 when I offered to renumber out of a /20 plus a smattering of other
blocks...mathematically impossible, of course). So, when I called them
back, they told me that renumbering out of our upstream provided space
wasn't part of getting the allocation, and wasn't considered in the
allocation process.

So, now, when I go for them for the next allocation, stating that I
*wanted* to renumber out of these blocks, what do I get? Another /20
(now even more mathematically impossible than ever). So, when I called
emailed them for clarification, pointing out that I was actively looking
to renumber out of upstream provided space and that a /20 wasn't enough
space to do so...they told me that they weren't going to give me the
space because the policy's wouldn't allow it (thus my first post), and
that "You were going to renumber when you got your last allocation
several years ago, and you didn't." (quote isn't exact, but captures the
spirit of what was said).

Needless to say...ARIN needs a big foam cluebat upside the head...alas,
I don't see it happening.

So, you didn't renumber out of PA space into PI space and then upon hitting
80% utilization asking for additional PI space, which would have been
justified at such point?

Perhaps the cluebat might do more good on you?

2

Also Sprach bdragon@gweep.net

So, you didn't renumber out of PA space into PI space and then upon
hitting 80% utilization asking for additional PI space, which would
have been justified at such point?

I was *EXPLICITLY* told that renumbering wasn't an issue. Additionally,
I only applied for space when we had utilized at 80% plus utilization of
*all* of our previously allocated space (not just the previous
allocation, as ARIN requires). I've gone above and beyond on the
requirements.

Perhaps the cluebat might do more good on you?

Careful wielding the cluebat...you might drop it on your foot.

3

Thus spake <bdragon@gweep.net>

So, you didn't renumber out of PA space into PI space and then upon
hitting 80% utilization asking for additional PI space, which would have
been justified at such point?

Perhaps the cluebat might do more good on you?

Please explain how somebody with more than 4096 hosts in PA space is
supposed to renumber into a /20 of PI space.

I fear you propose that he move the first 3276.8 hosts, request a second
block, move another 3276.8 hosts, request a third block, etc. until he's got
a dozen new allocations which can't be aggregated. Perhaps this explains
the explosive growth in the routing tables since ARIN took over.

S

Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

4

Perhaps the poster who mentioned they didn't get enough space to renumber
should have started, filled the allocation, requested another, and
finished the renumbering. In your request, did you mention any sort of
projected timeline for renumbering into the block you requested?

Maybe someone should write an update for rfc2050. Depending on which IP
analyst your request is handled by, rfc2050 may be invoked, which states:

       Additional address allocations will provide enough address space
       to enable the ISP to assign addresses for three months
       without requesting additional address space from its parent
       registry. Please note that projected customer base has little
       impact on the address allocations made by the parent registries.

I don't know anyone who's actually followed this, but I haven't
communicated with many ARIN members about this sort of thing lately. Is
this policy being enforced consistently now? I know in the past, ARIN has
had their own policies (at least for initial and at one time for second
allocations) that pretty much ignored this. Once upon a time, you could
request a /20 from a reserved /19 as long as you were multi-homed and
could justify a /21. Fill the first /20 in 18 months or less, and you get
the other half, and have a /19. I think the rationale for this at the
time was routing filters, as you were allowed to announce the /19 even
before the second half of it was officially yours. Now, the ARIN tune
seems to be "we only assign numbers, routability is your problem".

I don't claim to have an easy solution for this. If every idiot with a
business plan could request and receive a /16, there'd be an awful lot of
wasted space. But if you've been around for most of the past decade and
have continued to grow, should you really be issued new non-agregable
blocks every several months?

Somebody must have a better idea.

5

the way the registries handle it is better than rfc2050 tho surely? i mean they
are encouraging folks to announce fewer routes by exceeding their requirement
and its the routing table size we're more concerned about

i thought the panic about wasted space had passed since people noticed we're
only using a small chunk of the available space (post cidr)

Steve

6

Also Sprach jlewis@lewis.org

Please explain how somebody with more than 4096 hosts in PA space is
supposed to renumber into a /20 of PI space.

I fear you propose that he move the first 3276.8 hosts, request a
second block, move another 3276.8 hosts, request a third block, etc.
until he's got a dozen new allocations which can't be aggregated.
Perhaps this explains the explosive growth in the routing tables since
ARIN took over.

Perhaps the poster who mentioned they didn't get enough space to
renumber should have started, filled the allocation, requested another,
and finished the renumbering.

Ignoring, for the moment, that absolute absurdity of that type of
procedure...you forget what I've now said twice...that ARIN said as
clarification after I got the first block that renumbering wasn't a
consideration, full stop.

Either ARIN's policies are screwed up beyond even what I thought to
begin with, or their communications with customers/ISPs/whatever is
absolutely pitiful. Most likely, both.

In your request, did you mention any sort of projected timeline for
renumbering into the block you requested?

During the first request, we proposed a timeline of 6 months to a year
for renumber, if I remember correctly. And please don't even *think* of
suggesting that we should have done it in 3 months...that's just
laughable.

I don't know anyone who's actually followed this, but I haven't
communicated with many ARIN members about this sort of thing lately.
Is this policy being enforced consistently now? I know in the past,
ARIN has had their own policies (at least for initial and at one time
for second allocations) that pretty much ignored this. Once upon a
time, you could request a /20 from a reserved /19 as long as you were
multi-homed and could justify a /21. Fill the first /20 in 18 months
or less, and you get the other half, and have a /19. I think the
rationale for this at the time was routing filters, as you were allowed
to announce the /19 even before the second half of it was officially
yours. Now, the ARIN tune seems to be "we only assign numbers,
routability is your problem".

FWIW, the second block that we got just a short time ago, was an
extension of the previous /20, to make it a /19...not that this is
relevant, in any way, to any of the issues raised. We still haven't
never received from ARIN, a sufficiently large block to be able to
renumber out of the currently utilized space as was offered for the
first request, and strongly requested for the second; and the
communications that we received after the first request was a flat out
lie about the consideration of renumbering in allocations.

There is no was for ARIN to get out of this one smelling like
roses...they screwed up...probably twice, depending on your opinions
about policies...but at least once in the lie about renumbering
considerations.

I don't claim to have an easy solution for this. If every idiot with a
business plan could request and receive a /16, there'd be an awful lot
of wasted space.

FWIW, the first request we made was for a /19, which would have been the
smallest single block that could have been allocated to us to allow us
to renumber into; and the second request was for an /18, with the same
reasoning. We got /20's both times (with the second /20 being the
second half of the /19 of the first /20).

But if you've been around for most of the past decade and have
continued to grow, should you really be issued new non-agregable blocks
every several months?

IgLou has been in the Internet providing business for the better part of
15 years.

Somebody must have a better idea.

Here's a radical thought. Use some common sense and critical thinking
skills in deciding what the allocation should be. It certainly seems to
be lacking at the moment.

7

Ignoring, for the moment, that absolute absurdity of that type of
procedure...you forget what I've now said twice...that ARIN said as
clarification after I got the first block that renumbering wasn't a
consideration, full stop.

I don't see how that's at all absurd. You said you had a /20 and some
additional blocks of PA space. What's wrong with doing a slow renumber of
customers into your PI block? When you utilize 80% of the PI block, ask
ARIN for more space to continue renumbering. Note: I'm not saying
renumber into PI block-A, then ask for a bigger block and renumber out of
A into bigger block-B...just an additional block that you can continue to
use both for new customers and to continue renumbering customers who were
using your PA space. Where's the crazy part here?

Either ARIN's policies are screwed up beyond even what I thought to
begin with, or their communications with customers/ISPs/whatever is
absolutely pitiful. Most likely, both.

ARIN's policies do change over time, which can be surprising and annoying
(you get used to a policy or think you know their policy...time goes by,
and then you find what you know is invalid). It's a pain, but it's life.

During the first request, we proposed a timeline of 6 months to a year
for renumber, if I remember correctly. And please don't even *think* of
suggesting that we should have done it in 3 months...that's just
laughable.

It's alot of work, but laughable? Why? You're talking to someone who
simultaneously moved an ISP's physical network from one building to
another (across town), changed backbone providers, multihomed, did BGP for
the first time, and renumbered from 2 /20's of PA space (we weren't using
much of the second /20 and with inefficiencies cleaned up, really only
needed most of a /20) into a /20 of a reserved /19 of PI space in about a
week (all at the same time including moving customer T1's) while the old
landlord was threatening lock us out, and the old backbone provider
threatening to shut us off! It took alot of planning, a week of very long
days, and alot of customer hand holding, but it can be done. But all that
said, who said you should have to renumber inside of 3 months?
  

FWIW, the second block that we got just a short time ago, was an
extension of the previous /20, to make it a /19...not that this is
relevant, in any way, to any of the issues raised. We still haven't
never received from ARIN, a sufficiently large block to be able to
renumber out of the currently utilized space as was offered for the
first request, and strongly requested for the second; and the
communications that we received after the first request was a flat out
lie about the consideration of renumbering in allocations.

Is there some reason you need to have 1 PI block big enough to handle
renumbering out of all your PA blocks? Why can't you renumber some of the
PA space into PI space, return the no longer used PA space to P, and get
more PI blocks from ARIN to continue the renumbering?

There is no was for ARIN to get out of this one smelling like
roses...they screwed up...probably twice, depending on your opinions
about policies...but at least once in the lie about renumbering
considerations.

I like to bash ARIN as much as the next member, but I just don't see it
here. Either I'm not getting some part of your story, or you've got some
really weird ideas about PI space and renumbering.

FWIW, the first request we made was for a /19, which would have been the
smallest single block that could have been allocated to us to allow us
to renumber into; and the second request was for an /18, with the same
reasoning. We got /20's both times (with the second /20 being the
second half of the /19 of the first /20).

If you're really using a /18 of PA space, and using it efficiently
according to ARIN guidelines, I'd be really surprised if you filled out
the application for space and said "here's how we're using a /18 worth of
PA space, we'd like to renumber from it into PI space, and will do so over
X months." and ARIN didn't allocate you a /18. If you've already tried
this and failed, it may just be a matter of how you're filling out the
form.

8

Not at ARIN. Ask for "too much" space, and they will quote rfc2050 to
you.

9

and how to get what they want, and 99% of the ARIN using population lives
in either a) fear of dealing with ARIN for things that they technically
qualify for, and/or b) utter loathing and hatred from past experiences.

Unfortunately, the people who are capable of changing things are the ones
who fall into the 1% category, hence they never see the problem or need.
The "public policy" forums like ARIN-PPML don't help matters either, as
any form of common sense seems to be drowned out amongst the net kooks and
other wackjobs.

Meanwhile, the 99% category sits around wondering about things like:

* Why does the ARIN email system takes an hour just to generate an
  auto-acknowledgment?

* Why does it take days, and sometimes many days, to process a form and at
  the very least get a simple YAY or NAY on the syntax so you can continue
  submitting without finding out 99 forms later that your first form had a
  typo and invalidated all the rest.

* Why does it seem like no human touches a form until after 4PM Eastern?

* Why does the theoretically automated form processing for things like
  SWIPs still take over an hour to get a YAY or NAY email through.

* Why does it take a week to process a payment?

* Why have I NEVER been able to submit an ARIN request without receiving
  a response asking for information I included in the original request.

* Why do we have to submit to the equivalent of an IP anal probe, and
  cough up extremely detailed documentation on network architectures and
  the use of every IP address.

* Why any of this "police state" is necessary given that the shortage of
  IPv4 addresses seems to be artifically created. There are still tons of
  IP addresses that are either unallocated, unreasonably allocated (hey
  Merit, lets see your documentation on 35.0.0.0/8 :P), or long dead and
  never reclaimed. Only 32% of the available IPv4 space is being
  announced, where is the shortage?

* Why do we have to pay very large sums of money ($2500+ per year at a
  minimum) for this wonderful IP policing service. Where in the heck does
  all that money go?

* Why are we expected to continue the status quo of paying thousands of
  dollars for addresses in IPv6? Without the threat of an artifical
  shortage to "manage", what possible reason is there to justify ARIN's
  existance or fees? Why do we all get the feeling IPv6 isn't an end to
  the expenses, but rather a vast new market of registration and renewal
  fees?

* http://www.arin.net/library/corp_docs/budget.html - Where does the $1M
  in "fringe benefits" go? Where does the extra $1.5M in revenue go? Why
  does ARIN need to spend so much in travel, etc?

* Why does ARIN have no problem assigning large blocks of unallocated
  space (usually 2x or more) around a new "customer" to accomodate for
  future growth, but have policies preventing ISPs from doing the same
  (aka 80% utilization for more space).

* Etc etc etc, not counting the problems that have already been mentioned.

Yes, if you take the time to try and figure out what goes on inside the
minds of ARIN, you'll find that some of the people actually do try to be
useful human beings. But most of us don't have the time or desire to do
that, we just want a system that works. I don't think the current system
meets anyone's standard for useful, efficient, or cost effective.

10

That's actually a really good question, and one you should do some
thinking about, and talk with people about, before it starts coming time
to make policy decisions.

When the day arrives when people don't want new IPv4 addresses, or there
aren't any to be had, and everybody who needs v6 addresses has them, how
is the registry going to be paid for?

                                -Bill

11

Also Sprach jlewis@lewis.org

Ignoring, for the moment, that absolute absurdity of that type of
procedure...you forget what I've now said twice...that ARIN said as
clarification after I got the first block that renumbering wasn't a
consideration, full stop.

I don't see how that's at all absurd.

Wow...ok...there's nothing that I'm going to be able to say for you to
understand. *shrug* Have fun continuing to get screwed by ARIN then.

Either ARIN's policies are screwed up beyond even what I thought to
begin with, or their communications with customers/ISPs/whatever is
absolutely pitiful. Most likely, both.

ARIN's policies do change over time, which can be surprising and
annoying (you get used to a policy or think you know their
policy...time goes by, and then you find what you know is invalid).
It's a pain, but it's life.

OK...then why hasn't *any* of the relevant documentation (which is
wrong, no matter which policy you're dealing with) changed?

It's alot of work, but laughable? Why? You're talking to someone who
simultaneously moved an ISP's physical network from one building to
another (across town), changed backbone providers, multihomed, did BGP
for the first time, and renumbered from 2 /20's of PA space (we weren't
using much of the second /20 and with inefficiencies cleaned up, really
only needed most of a /20) into a /20 of a reserved /19 of PI space in
about a week (all at the same time including moving customer T1's)
while the old landlord was threatening lock us out, and the old
backbone provider threatening to shut us off!

At that point, you're already making changes...the numbering changes
aren't that big of a deal at that point. Indeed...I find re-numbering
in the process of network redesigns/rebuilds actually makes both parts
of the process *easier*. (yes, I've done similar things) So, really,
you're argument here falls flat.

It took alot of planning, a week of very long days, and alot of
customer hand holding, but it can be done. But all that said, who said
you should have to renumber inside of 3 months?

ARIN's policies (at least as stated on their web pages...but we've
already shown those to be fictional) indicate that the renumbering would
have to happen before an additional block would be allocated, and that
they only allocate blocks based on anticipated 3 month growth (which is
also fictional...they actually base it on *past* growth, not anticipated
future growth, based on what I was told after the last allocation,
again...may be the truth, may not be, flip a coin)

Is there some reason you need to have 1 PI block big enough to handle
renumbering out of all your PA blocks? Why can't you renumber some of
the PA space into PI space, return the no longer used PA space to P,
and get more PI blocks from ARIN to continue the renumbering?

Suffice it to say, that would not have been practical in our case.
Additionally, based on what I've been told of ARIN's policies, they
wouldn't have granted the next block of PI space when we went back to
them for the next allocation.

There is no was for ARIN to get out of this one smelling like
roses...they screwed up...probably twice, depending on your opinions
about policies...but at least once in the lie about renumbering
considerations.

I like to bash ARIN as much as the next member, but I just don't see it
here.

They lied to me, full stop. Additionally, depending on your beliefs of
what's practical for renumbering policies...they screwed me over there
too by not giving me enough space (whether one block or more than one, I
don't give a crap...but this going back after renumbering half the
network is absurd).

Either I'm not getting some part of your story, or you've got some
really weird ideas about PI space and renumbering.

Its called common sense, but we've already established that its lacking
at ARIN.

FWIW, the first request we made was for a /19, which would have been
the smallest single block that could have been allocated to us to
allow us to renumber into; and the second request was for an /18, with
the same reasoning. We got /20's both times (with the second /20
being the second half of the /19 of the first /20).

If you're really using a /18 of PA space,

At the time of the second allocation, no, we weren't using a /18, but,
cumulative, we were using more than a /19 efficiently.

And, actually...I mispoke...we didn't request a /18 on the second
request, we, again, requested a /19 (thinking back on it, I realized I
mis-remembered it)...because of not needing to renumber out of the first
allocation...we just, again, wanted to renumber out of the PA (what does
the "A" stand for, there, by the way?) space, with a /20+. And, no, I'm
not going to renumber half my network then go back to ARIN again.
That's absurd to have to do that.

and using it efficiently according to ARIN guidelines,

As I've said before, we, in the past, and currently, are using *ALL* of
our allocated blocks (both PA and PI) efficiently (except, of course,
for the recently allocated one which is being used for current
assignments).

We're trying our darndest to "Do the Right Thing" by ARIN, and the
Internet Community as a whole, and be a good neighbor. We're efficiently
utilizing the space we have, again, all of it, beyond the requirements
of ARIN, we're advertising in BGP the minimum number of routes possible
given the allocations (both PA and PI) that we have, and we're desiring
(for business reasons as well as altruistic) to renumber out of PA space
into fewer, but larger, PI blocks. ARIN has been a stumbling block to
us accomplishing these things every step of the way.

ARIN has failed to accomplish everything that it was created to do. Its
whole purpose for existence has basically not been served.

I'd be really surprised if you filled out the application for space and
said "here's how we're using a /18 worth of PA space, we'd like to
renumber from it into PI space, and will do so over X months." and ARIN
didn't allocate you a /18. If you've already tried this and failed, it
may just be a matter of how you're filling out the form.

Well...as someone else mentioned...apparently you can never fill out an
ARIN form without ever being asked for clarification on a different
form. Why don't they just have you fill out the second form in the
first place?

Dealing with ARIN is a studying in dealing with inconsistency, reading
between the lines, discerning meaning from what's not said, a bit of
mind reading, and walking in shifting sands.

And some people wonder why most of the world dreads dealing with ARIN.

12

OK...then why hasn't *any* of the relevant documentation (which is
wrong, no matter which policy you're dealing with) changed?

Based on recent activity with www.arin.net, I think they're more concerned
with the look & feel of their web site than the actual content. I'd say
fire the graphic design person/people and use that money to simply keep
the site up to date and functional or to pay more IP analysts.

ARIN's policies (at least as stated on their web pages...but we've
already shown those to be fictional) indicate that the renumbering would
have to happen before an additional block would be allocated, and that

There does seem to be either a lack of consistency or some conflicting
policies depending on how many allocations you've gotten. You might get
used to one policy and then find it no longer applies to you.

they only allocate blocks based on anticipated 3 month growth (which is
also fictional...they actually base it on *past* growth, not anticipated
future growth, based on what I was told after the last allocation,
again...may be the truth, may not be, flip a coin)

I've run into this too...having ARIN point fingers at past growth and
simultaneously quoting rfc2050 saying to only request 3 months worth.
IMO, that policy sucks, which is why I suggested someone write an update
for rfc2050. Actually, once you get used to dealing with ARIN, filling
out the forms the way they want, and have your IP allocation data in a
format that lends itself to easily filling in the blanks on the request
form, getting more space isn't that big a deal, but it still is a pain to
do, requires updating filters, router configs, routing registries, etc.
and doing it several times a year just seems like a waste of time. Once a
year would be more acceptable.

Suffice it to say, that would not have been practical in our case.

If that's the sort of detail you gave ARIN, it's no surprise you've not
gotten what you want from them.

allocation...we just, again, wanted to renumber out of the PA (what does
the "A" stand for, there, by the way?) space, with a /20+. And, no, I'm

PI = provider indepentent (you can take it with you if you change providers)
PA = provider assigned (switch providers and you lose the space)
or were you being rhetorical for some reason?

not going to renumber half my network then go back to ARIN again.
That's absurd to have to do that.

Based on rfc2050 (if the IP analyst you get decides to invoke it), you're
going to have to renumber in 3 months if you want all that renumbering to
be into a single block. Like it or not, those appear to be the rules.

given the allocations (both PA and PI) that we have, and we're desiring
(for business reasons as well as altruistic) to renumber out of PA space
into fewer, but larger, PI blocks. ARIN has been a stumbling block to
us accomplishing these things every step of the way.

Other than doing your part to slow routing table growth (and the obvious
desire to get as much space as possible, as infrequently as possible from
ARIN), why do you care how many IP blocks (and what sizes) you have? For
traffic engineering purposes, there are actually advantages to more
smaller blocks.

ARIN has failed to accomplish everything that it was created to do. Its
whole purpose for existence has basically not been served.

It makes a big profit though :slight_smile: Have you seen their financial reports?

Well...as someone else mentioned...apparently you can never fill out an
ARIN form without ever being asked for clarification on a different
form. Why don't they just have you fill out the second form in the
first place?

Practice. My first few times, I had to clarify things, and they'd
typically not ask for all clarifications at once, so you clarify
something, then they ask for clarification on something else. This last
time, I think they only asked once for clarifications on a couple of
larger allocations, one of which was actually fully mentioned in the
initial application, but they didn't put the info in 2 different parts of
the application together. If you fill out the form properly and just
assume that they'll want clarification on any /24 or larger assignment to
a customer, you probably won't spend much time going back and forth on
clarifications. If you have ISP customers, allocate (not assign) space to
them so they can do their own swips, and tell them they have to do it.

And some people wonder why most of the world dreads dealing with ARIN.

Most of the world doesn't have to...just North America.

13

Also Sprach jlewis@lewis.org

Based on recent activity with www.arin.net, I think they're more concerned
with the look & feel of their web site than the actual content. I'd say
fire the graphic design person/people and use that money to simply keep
the site up to date and functional or to pay more IP analysts.

...

There does seem to be either a lack of consistency or some conflicting
policies depending on how many allocations you've gotten. You might get
used to one policy and then find it no longer applies to you.

...

I've run into this too...having ARIN point fingers at past growth and
simultaneously quoting rfc2050 saying to only request 3 months worth.
IMO, that policy sucks, which is why I suggested someone write an update
for rfc2050. Actually, once you get used to dealing with ARIN, filling
out the forms the way they want, and have your IP allocation data in a
format that lends itself to easily filling in the blanks on the request
form, getting more space isn't that big a deal, but it still is a pain to
do, requires updating filters, router configs, routing registries, etc.
and doing it several times a year just seems like a waste of time. Once a
year would be more acceptable.

We're in agreement on these points...

FWIW, our SWIP's are perfectly up to do. While they're not filed
automatically by our billing/provisioning system, it does put in a
ticket into our ticket tracking system to tell one of our technicians to
do it...and our billing/provisioning system is *anal* about it, too. :slight_smile:

Suffice it to say, that would not have been practical in our case.

If that's the sort of detail you gave ARIN, it's no surprise you've not
gotten what you want from them.

No, I gave ARIN considerably more detail than that...I just don't care
to share what could be considered internal, proprietary information
about our network on a public mailing list. We don't have a great deal
to hide, and we don't do things drastically differently than many other
networks, but I'd rather not broadcast how we're set up far and wide,
thanks.

allocation...we just, again, wanted to renumber out of the PA (what
does the "A" stand for, there, by the way?) space, with a /20+. And,
no, I'm

PI = provider indepentent (you can take it with you if you change providers)
PA = provider assigned (switch providers and you lose the space)
or were you being rhetorical for some reason?

No, I knew the concepts, I just couldn't figure out what the "A"
expanded out to. Nothing more.

going to have to renumber in 3 months if you want all that renumbering
to be into a single block. Like it or not, those appear to be the
rules.

Yup, thus my comment(s) about common sense being dead.

given the allocations (both PA and PI) that we have, and we're
desiring (for business reasons as well as altruistic) to renumber out
of PA space into fewer, but larger, PI blocks. ARIN has been a
stumbling block to us accomplishing these things every step of the
way.

Other than doing your part to slow routing table growth (and the
obvious desire to get as much space as possible, as infrequently as
possible from ARIN), why do you care how many IP blocks (and what
sizes) you have? For traffic engineering purposes, there are actually
advantages to more smaller blocks.

Agreed...having smaller blocks allows finer grained control of
traffic...but for the reasons you noted, there, we're trying to "Do the
Right Thing", as I said. While we're a business, and are in it to make
money, (and successfully do so), we still try to have something of a
community minded approach to dealing with issues of commons (such as
routing table size, ip address depletion, etc.). I know its rare to see
an ISP actually care about things like that for other's benefit...but
that's really, a large part of the reason that we try to do this.

Of course, not having to go back to ARIN every 3 months is a benefit as
well, so its not completely altruistic, but there is certainly an
element of altruism (believe it or not) to it.

ARIN has failed to accomplish everything that it was created to do.
Its whole purpose for existence has basically not been served.

It makes a big profit though :slight_smile: Have you seen their financial reports?

I've been scared to look. I'm already cynical enough about ARIN.

Well...as someone else mentioned...apparently you can never fill out
an ARIN form without ever being asked for clarification on a
different form. Why don't they just have you fill out the second
form in the first place?

Practice.

Well...that gives me hope for the future...and other than being
annoying, wasn't really the crux of my issues with ARIN.

And some people wonder why most of the world dreads dealing with
ARIN.

Most of the world doesn't have to...just North America.

True...but my point is still basically valid, if you ignore the
ethnocentrism.

14

How is a commercial, for profit service, like, say, an ISP
expected to justify spending thousands upon thousands to 'lease' IPv6
space that their customers (in most cases, at least in the US) won't pay
them anything additional to use?

  When everyone's cutting costs, in many cases simply to survive
in this market... why are they expected to fund a registry's operations?

  Charging for v6 allocations may make sense...in a few years.
We're not there yet. And I doubt that v4 will cease being a moneymaker
any time soon.

  --msa

15

Richard A Steenbergen wrote:

* Why have I NEVER been able to submit an ARIN request without receiving
  a response asking for information I included in the original request.

I would say it's because you need to explain yourself more clearly in your
requests. You can never give them too much information, so bowl them over
with all the detail you can possibly muster up. And if you find they're
asking for similar information every time, perhaps including that information
in the initial application would negate the need for a clarification.

Bottom line - you have to type a lot. Sorry.

* Why do we have to submit to the equivalent of an IP anal probe, and
  cough up extremely detailed documentation on network architectures and
  the use of every IP address.

I think this goes without saying. How else can the Internet community be
assurred of efficient address space utilization on both a local and global
level ? If you can't justify the need for IP space, no soup for you. It's
inconvenient, but it has to be done to ensure proper utilization.

* Why any of this "police state" is necessary given that the shortage of
  IPv4 addresses seems to be artifically created. There are still tons of
  IP addresses that are either unallocated, unreasonably allocated (hey
  Merit, lets see your documentation on 35.0.0.0/8 :P), or long dead and
  never reclaimed. Only 32% of the available IPv4 space is being
  announced, where is the shortage?

See above - if there wasn't the policing in place, you wouldn't be asking this
question. The shortage isn't the reason for ARIN's policies. Ongoing
scalability and sustainability from local accountability and adherence to good
practice is.

* Why do we have to pay very large sums of money ($2500+ per year at a
  minimum) for this wonderful IP policing service. Where in the heck does
  all that money go?

The flaming pitchforks ? :slight_smile:

* Why does ARIN have no problem assigning large blocks of unallocated
  space (usually 2x or more) around a new "customer" to accomodate for
  future growth, but have policies preventing ISPs from doing the same
  (aka 80% utilization for more space).

Because they need to give them something to start off with, then adjust future
allocations based on their growth.

Networks who have demonstrated the need for a certain size block will get that
size block based on past usage. If their utilization increases, they may have
to apply early. In doing so, they may demonstrate that a larger block is
needed this time. How's that for a benefit.

* Etc etc etc, not counting the problems that have already been mentioned.

Yes, if you take the time to try and figure out what goes on inside the
minds of ARIN, you'll find that some of the people actually do try to be
useful human beings. But most of us don't have the time or desire to do
that, we just want a system that works. I don't think the current system
meets anyone's standard for useful, efficient, or cost effective.

There is no such thing as a shortage of time, only a shortage of priority.
Giving ARIN what they want takes time and can be a pain in the nether regions,
but it is a necessary evil. The system works if you take the time and
attention to make it work for you.

Andrea Abrahamsen
Software Engineer, Intelligent Network Services
Cisco Systems

16

Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 09:10:44 -0400
From: Jeff McAdams

They lied to me, full stop. Additionally, depending on your beliefs of
what's practical for renumbering policies...they screwed me over there
too by not giving me enough space (whether one block or more than one, I
don't give a crap...but this going back after renumbering half the
network is absurd).

"Here's our current address utilization; details are attached.
We require a /X for our immediate use."

*time passes*

"Here is your new PI block. Show at least 80% utilization before
asking for more space."

"Uh... this block you gave us? Utilization will be in excess of
100%, because it's not big enough to hold everything. We're
renumbering out of the old space."

"Here's a form. Please fill it out in detail, indicating how
your address space is used."

ARIN has failed to accomplish everything that it was created to do. Its
whole purpose for existence has basically not been served.

Hmmmm. 96/5 and AS4xxxx are hereby under the authority of
AlteRIN. Rob, please add these to your list.

:wink:

Eddy

17

I hate to pile on, but Andrea is right.

I had absolutely no problem getting any of my ARIN numbers because I wrote
an essay about my network. I though at the time that it was a waste of my
time but have come to understand even more about my network than before.

Even if you know your network and what you need like the back of your hand,
ARIN doesn't. They don't even really want to.

On an initial allocation they don't know "JACK" about you. You need to
supply them with a reason to trust you and pouring out your network "guts"
on the request usually does the trick.

JMHO

Brian Johnson
Internet Operations Specialist
Northern Valley Communications

18

Thus spake "Bill Woodcock" <woody@pch.net>

When the day arrives when people don't want new IPv4 addresses, or
there aren't any to be had, and everybody who needs v6 addresses has
them, how is the registry going to be paid for?

That's why RIRs lease addresses to you, not sell them -- they get to keep
collecting money forever even if they do no additional work.

S

Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

19

RIRs _allocate_ addresses, meaning that they provide the _service_ of
_registering uniqueness_. You pay a _membership fee_ to support the
ongoing operation of the registry, and allow it to continue providing you
with the _service of uniqueness_ for your addresses.

You don't buy them, you don't lease them. You buy the service of the
RIR's maintenance of a database which ensures unique allocations.

                                -Bill

20

* Why do we have to pay very large sums of money ($2500+ per year at a
  minimum) for this wonderful IP policing service. Where in the heck does
  all that money go?

From http://www.arin.net/library/corp_docs/budget.html :

Out of the $7,861,700.00 they raked in last year:

SALARIES $2,326,653.85
FRINGE BENEFITS $1,045,063.15
HIRING COSTS $75,000.00
TRAVEL AND CONFERENCE $631,732.40
COMMUNICATIONS $236,699.62
COMPUTER $118,941.75
DEPRECIATION $445,750.00
RENT & OCCUPANCY $461,287.00
GENERAL OFFICE $192,400.00
LEGAL FEES $100,000.00
Legal Defense Fund $200,000.00
ICANN SUPPORT $188,480.00
Other Internet Support - Merit & ISOC $100,000.00
LACNIC SUPPORT $66,000.00
CONSULTING $184,000.00
Total $6,372,007.76

In other words, they're milking the cash cow.

* Why are we expected to continue the status quo of paying thousands of
  dollars for addresses in IPv6? Without the threat of an artifical
  shortage to "manage", what possible reason is there to justify ARIN's
  existance or fees? Why do we all get the feeling IPv6 isn't an end to
  the expenses, but rather a vast new market of registration and renewal
  fees?

Because the owners of the cash cow don't want it to go away.