I keep seeing questions going back and forth on this issue. As I understand it
two things are trying to be accomplished, first ARIN issued resources are to be
primarily used on equipment located within the ARIN region, and second there
needs to be some sort of legal presence with contact information in the ARIN
region that can be kept in the ARIN database for everyone including law
enforcement to access. Can't the policy simply say there must be a legal
presence and the resources must be used within the ARIN region, and that
resources can be de-allocated if either ceases to be true?
The elegance of the Internet is that it can expand an organization's reach -
including across RIR boundaries, so who cares if a web server or a virtual
server (or whatever) that is physically located in the ARIN region is access by
tons of folks outside the region. There just needs to be a legal presence and
contact information to go along with that allocation. Trying to apply some
test such as majority or plurality will just cause unnecessary complexity and
the current policies are complex enough without needlessly adding to it. My 2
cents.
Steven Ryerse
President
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338
770.656.1460 - Cell
770.399.9099- Office
℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
Conquering Complex Networks℠
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of John Curran
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 1:16 PM
To: Frank Bulk
Cc: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-6: Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6
Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors - Revised
On Oct 8, 2013, at 9:26 AM, Frank Bulk <[email protected]>
wrote:
> John,
>
> What if Acme Hosting, Inc., located in the Silicon Valley, found a
> niche offering virtualized servers for Asian customers who want to
> have their Internet-based services hosted more closely to the North American
> market.
>
> Acme Hosting and their infrastructure are clearly in the U.S., but
> their customers are not in the ARIN region.
Their physical infrastructure would only qualify for modest address space in
accordance with policy, and this would not change with the addition of
virtualized servers on existing equipment.
> Does the policy, as currently written, preclude Acme Hosting from
> requesting more address space as their Asian customer base grows?
Under current policy, they may request additional addresses as their customers
grow. Under the current revised policy text, we would not consider their
customers who are not in region. This side effect (hosting companies not being
able to consider customers who are out of region) may or may not be desirable,
but is understandable given the additional of customer region as criteria.
FYI,
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public
Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
