Hi Steven,
That was my experience like over a decade ago - except that I was not
applying for IPv6 just IPv4 - of course back in those days we didn't
call it IPv4 we just called it IP - I called ARIN - talked to them -
answered a few more questions the hostmaster had - and the No turned
into a Yes.
I can't get too excited about someone who submitted a webform, got
denied, then said "oh well" and never pursued it any further. Which is
what your story here says what happened. In a shortage market I would
expect more of an effort from a requestor to obtain something than just
clicking Submit on a webform. At the very least, a phone call.
Today if I had to do it over again and got a No, I'd probably be
buying a plane ticket and visiting ARIN's offices.
The reality is we are out of IPv4. Assigning more of it isn't
advancing the Internet. Assigning IPv6 IS advancing the Internet.
People can get IPv4 from their upstreams. Yes it will cost and yes it
will make it harder to renumber. That is the price that you have to pay
in a market with severe shortages. That's why we pay $3-$4 a gallon for
gasoline.
If you did indeed do anything further then please elaborate - right
now I can only judge by what you have said in your story - and it's just
not very compelling.
Ted
On 12/16/2014 10:10 AM, Steven Ryerse wrote:
My experience was that I applied to ARIN for a /32 IPv6 block, a /22
IPv4 block (the minimum at the time), and an ASN number. The online
application asked me some questions which I answered. Once it was
processed I was notified that the IPv6 block and the ASN number were
allocated to me, and the IPv4 block allocation was denied. This was
about 3 years ago and at the time I thought the questions I was asked
were reasonable. I don’t recall having to provide anything else except
maybe a bill from my upstream provider.
I don’t have an issue with asking an applicant some basic questions but
I have a strong issue with using the answers to those questions to deny
an applicant the minimum block size. Regardless of the original intent,
the effect is the haves keeping the have nots from getting resources and
this falls squarely on small organizations. My opinion.
/Steven L Ryerse/
/President/
/100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338/
/770.656.1460 - Cell/
/770.399.9099 - Office/
/770.392-0076 - Fax/
Description: Description: Description: Eclipse Networks
Logo_small.png℠Eclipse Networks, Inc.
^Conquering Complex Networks ^℠ ^
*From:*Owen DeLong [mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:* Monday, December 15, 2014 9:08 PM
*To:* Steven Ryerse
*Cc:* Kevin Kargel; [email protected]
*Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] 2014-1 Out of Region Use
My point is that even before that discussion, there was and always has
been needs testing for IPv6.
Your claim that what they were advocating for is something new, as if
IPv6 wasn't already subject to needs testing is specious.
As such, I'm not sure what would cause you to want to scream.
Owen
On Dec 15, 2014, at 14:21 , Steven Ryerse
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
wrote:
No, my request for a IPv6 /32 was fulfilled by ARIN. My IPv6 comment
below was concerning discussion of a policy proposal for a past
proposal.
/Steven Ryerse/
/President/
/100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338/
/770.656.1460 - Cell/
/770.399.9099- Office/
<image001.jpg>℠Eclipse Networks, Inc.
^Conquering Complex Networks ^℠
*From:*Owen DeLong [mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:*Monday, December 15, 2014 5:14 PM
*To:*Steven Ryerse
*Cc:*Kevin Kargel; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:*Re: [arin-ppml] 2014-1 Out of Region Use
We have always had and still do have needs testing on all IPv6
allocations and assignments.
Do you know anyone who is having trouble getting the IPv6 space that
they need?
Owen
On Dec 15, 2014, at 10:49 , Steven Ryerse
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I saw folks in this Community when discussing a policy proposal
earlier this year – advocating for needs testing on all IPv6
allocations. I wanted to scream when I read it!
As far as the Internet being different today, ARINs Mission
doesn’t go out the window because of Internet changes.
/Steven Ryerse/
/President/
/100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338/
/770.656.1460 - Cell/
/770.399.9099- Office/
<image001.jpg>℠Eclipse Networks, Inc.
^Conquering Complex Networks ^℠
*From:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>[mailto:[email protected]]*On
Behalf Of*Kevin Kargel
*Sent:*Monday, December 15, 2014 1:12 PM
*To:*[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:*[arin-ppml] 2014-1 Out of Region Use
The internet is a different place now and things change and
evolve over time. If a modern day entrepreneur needed IP space
they would have little or no problem finding all the IPv6 space
they need at little or no cost and with virtually no trouble.
When Jobs and Wozniak were starting up IPV4 was a different animal.
Kevin
*From:*[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>[mailto:[email protected]]*On
Behalf Of*Steven Ryerse
*Sent:*Monday, December 15, 2014 10:16 AM
*To:*Bill Darte
*Cc:*[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:*Re: [arin-ppml] 2014-1 Out of Region Use
By that definition, I wonder if Jobs and Wozniak needed IP
resources today for their garage - could they get them? Whether
you like what they did or not they certainly have advanced the
Internet. And if John and Sue are working in their garage today
and need a /24 or a /22 from ARIN to further the Internet, can
they get them? With today’s policies – probably not as they
might not have a business plan yet, or signed contract with
contractors, or gotten their funding - or any other measure of
need that is currently indoctrinated in policy. What a shame!
//
/Steven Ryerse/
/President/
/100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338/
/www.eclipse-networks.com <http://www.eclipse-networks.com/>/
/770.656.1460 - Cell/
/770.399.9099- Office/
<image001.jpg>℠Eclipse Networks, Inc.
^Conquering Complex Networks ^℠
*From:*Bill Darte [mailto:[email protected]]
*Sent:*Monday, December 15, 2014 6:10 AM
*To:*Steven Ryerse
*Cc:*Jo Rhett;[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:*Re: [arin-ppml] 2014-1 Out of Region Use
Steven Ryerse said:
In my opinion this community is so caught up in making sure
needs based policies are followed, that it has lost sight of the
real mission of advancing the Internet. Regardless of your
personal definition of need, why is some org who doesn't have a
need (as currently defined by policy) now precluded from getting
resources? How does that advance the Internet?
The community through ARIN is ensuring that the distribution of
v4 IP addresses are according to its policies which have been
and should continue to be needs-based..IMO. They are not 'caught
up' in the sense that they cannot proceed...ndeed, they are
doing the precise business that policy and its mission calls
for. That some orgs that cannot meet the needs hurdle are
denied...does not mean that others who truly have a need are not
serviced. Those with clear need advance the Internet and do so
demonstrably...whereas those without a demonstrable need MAY
advance the Internet as well, but its a greater risk to the
community and one which the community has chosen to forgo.
Bill Darte
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Steven Ryerse
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Though it has been a few months since I made those comments,
I appreciate your feedback. Your description of "walk away
with someone else’s belongings" seems to indicate that
somehow the use of the Internet and the IP addresses that
make the use of the Internet possible, is owned by ARIN or
this Community or maybe ARIN and this Community.
I find that line of thinking about as far as one can get
from the spirit of Jon Postel and the way he went about
advancing the Internet. When I read the original Mission
Statement for ARIN or even the current one, I don't see that
"needs" are more important than the actual mission of
advancement and allocation. Good stewardship should be
practiced but NOT to the detriment of the mission of
advancement and allocation.
In my opinion this community is so caught up in making sure
needs based policies are followed, that it has lost sight of
the real mission of advancing the Internet. Regardless of
your personal definition of need, why is some org who
doesn't have a need (as currently defined by policy) now
precluded from getting resources? How does that advance the
Internet? I never met Jon Postel but from what I've heard
about him, I suspect he would frown on some of the current
policies regarding needs. My comments below and others I
have made are intended to try to bring some balance into the
discussion and my hope is that some day in the near future
that will happen. I certainly don't desire there be no rules
at all but the very loose rules followed by Jon Postel
worked pretty well advancing the Internet. I think we could
loosen the current policies like has been done in other
regions and it would have a positive outcome. My two cents.
Steven Ryerse
President
100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA 30338
www.eclipse-networks.com <http://www.eclipse-networks.com/>
770.656.1460 <tel:770.656.1460> - Cell
770.399.9099 <tel:770.399.9099>- Office
℠Eclipse Networks, Inc.
Conquering Complex Networks℠
-----Original Message-----
From: Jo Rhett [mailto:[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>]
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 12:17 AM
To: Steven Ryerse
Cc:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] 2014-1 Out of Region Use
On Oct 27, 2014, at 5:23 PM, Steven Ryerse
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> If in the spirit of trying to prevent fraud
non-fraudulent requests get rejected, then Arin's mission
stops being fulfilled. I think it is important to make sure
the mission is respected first and stopping fraud second or
third or fifth or whatever. We could stop all fraud by
stopping all allocations but of course that makes no sense.
I would also point out that even when fraud happens Arin's
Mission is still being fulfilled.
I completely disagree. There are dozens if not hundreds of
people with non-fraudulent requests who get denied for
insufficient justification. That is ARIN doing their job
successfully in my mind. If widespread fraud occurs and ARIN
does not take action, then I feel strongly that ARIN would
not be doing their job.
> Of course maybe if the needs tests were loosened fraud
would be significantly reduced as there would be no need to
submit fraudulent requests.
Do you mean that if it were permissible to walk away with
someone else’s belongings, then theft would no longer occur?
Your statement is true without making any sense at all.
> I'm sure an org willing to submit a fraudulent request
would tell you that they do have a need but they may not
happen to meet the current arbitrary (and they are
arbitrary) policy.
I disagree completely. ARIN’s role is to satisfy needs-based
requests. Exercising judgement of whether a need is
realistic is doing their job.
The only thing arbitrary here is your desire for there to be
no rules at all. Deeply amusing, but not helpful for
realistic policy.
--
Jo Rhett
+1 (415) 999-1798 <tel:%2B1%20%28415%29%20999-1798>
Skype: jorhett
Net Consonance : net philanthropy to improve open source and
internet projects.
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please [email protected] <mailto:[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]
<mailto:[email protected]>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please [email protected] <mailto:[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.
_______________________________________________
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.
