On Apr 4, 2014, at 11:00 AM, Steven Ryerse <[email protected]> wrote:

> If an org with no resources applies they should at least be able to get the 
> minimum which has been set by this community which I think is currently at a 
> /22.  Always!

Depends… End-user /24, ISP multi-homed /22, ISP non-multi-homed /20 IIRC.

> If an org wants larger than a /22 they need to be able to demonstrate in a 
> reasonable way that they are a larger org with a network size that justifies 
> a larger allocation.  The first way is what allocation do they already have?  
> If they have say a /19  or equivalent maybe they can demonstrate they need 
> say another /19 by furnishing to ARIN maybe their financials and the 
> investment they have actually made to justify another /19 or whatever.  (I'm 
> just using the /19 as an example.)

Why would financials or investment have any direct correlation with network 
size in any organization, let alone all organizations?

> Organizations supply financials to Banks all the time and this and supplying 
> network info can be a similar process.  If an org can prove they just spent 
> 50 million on a new data center then that should be justification to get an 
> allocation of a size to run that size data center. 

How do you judge the size of a datacenter in IP resource requirements based on 
the amount of money spent on the datacenter? A relatively small datacenter with 
a lot of virtual hosts on a small number of machines might need a whole lot 
more IP addressing than a vastly more expensive datacenter housing a small 
number of supercomputers and their ancillary systems, costing 100s or even 
1000s of times more money.

> So if we want the current minimum we should just apply and it should be 
> allocated, and as long as we keep paying our fees to ARIN it is ours to use.  
> If we stop paying that block goes back into the pool that ARIN has to 
> allocate.  

So if I stand up a bunch of shell companies, they should each be able to get a 
/22 and I should be able to repeat that exercise until I run out of money or 
desire for address space? An interesting theory.

> If we want a /19 or a /16 then we need to satisfy ARIN that we are an org of 
> that size and have a network that justifies a /19 or a /16.  And maybe prove 
> the actual expenditures. 
> 
> And if we want a /9, regardless of what we have now, we're gonna really have 
> to provide solid info that justifies the size of our org and the size of our 
> network justifies a /9.  

These two statements do not seem to differ from current practice, so I’m not 
sure what sort of change, if any, you are advocating for in this case.

> This is not rocket science. It would however require the input of the many 
> knowledgeable members of this community to help determine what is require at 
> each level.  I think this community could handle that just fine!

I think we have… How do you think the existing NRPM 4 and NRPM 6 (and the rest 
of NRPM for that matter) have come about?

Owen

_______________________________________________
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.

Reply via email to