Thanks for your comments! Actually the total number of possible .com
permutations is limited too. IPv4 addresses and .com domain names are both
just Internet resources that Internet users need to use the Internet.
Obviously there are less IPv4 addresses than .com combinations, but IPv4 is
still the only way to access most of the Internet. While ARIN has resources to
allocate - I'm absolutely fine limiting the size of an allocation to match the
size of an Org and their network, but I'm not fine with denying an Org any
resources.
Also IPv4 cannot somehow be saved by conservation. Regardless of any policy,
ARIN will run out of IPv4 probably within the next year. If .com domain names
were nearing runout, would that really make it OK to start denying small Orgs
.com domain name requests?
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 Andrew Sullivan
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 11:59 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Internet Fairness
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 04:35:41PM +0000, Steven Ryerse wrote:
>
> If it is not OK to deny the Minimum domain (available) name to an Org, then
> it isn’t OK to deny an Org the Minimum IP allocation. They are both
> Internet resources.
>
The analogy seems faulty to me. The number space is finite (and in the case of
v4, not very large). The name space in any given registry is admittedly not
infinite, since (1) it's limited to labels 63 octets long from the LDH
repertoire and (2) useful mnemonics are generally shorter than 63 octets and
usually a wordlike thing in some natural language. There are, however, lots of
registries (more all the time!
Thanks, ICANN!); and last I checked neither info nor biz was anything close to
the size (or utility) of com, even though they've both been around since 2001
and have rather similar registration rules. So, there is an argument in favour
of tight rules for allocation of v4 numbers that is not available in the name
case.
Best regards,
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
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.
