That´s not the point Bill. As per my last message, this wish or intent
he talks about looks more a convenience to get this into a more flexible
scenario and divert the propose of the pool to supply addresses and
support the emergence of IXPs with allowing them to act as RIRs and
supply addresses to third parties which have the ability to get them
direcetlly from the RIR. If the problem is that there is no IP space
left for them to do directly with the RIR this other way cannot be an
easier way to turning this pool into something that has never thought
for and divert its propose.
Addresses from this pool have always been meant to be used for IXP
Infrastructure and for connecting members in the LAN.
Fernando
On 22/04/2024 02:56, Bill Woodcock wrote:
Fernando: Owen is correct, the type of abuse you’re hypothesizing has
not, in fact, occurred, in 32 years of IXPs.
Since you’re the one proposing to impose a cost on everyone else, the
burden falls on you to prove that is solves an actual problem, not on
Owen to prove that it does not.
-Bill
On Apr 22, 2024, at 7:44 AM, Fernando Frediani <[email protected]>
wrote:
It seems you kind of disregards the basics of IP assignment and mix
up things and what they were made for and thought for. It is not
because something looks convenient, that is something right. When
conveniences prevail over the main point we start to miss the
discussion propose. What you are saying below looks more a personal
preference if you were in charge of an IX to make it develop than
what is the main point of the discussion how resources from a special
pool should be treated.
IXPs are not Broadband Services Providers nor RIRs and are not meant
to distribute IP space to anyone. IXPs need the IPs to build its core
services in order to interconnect ASNs locally. Organizations
connecting to an IXP have the ability to go directly to the RIR and
get resources from there through different ways and that's how it
should continue.
Fernando
On 22/04/2024 00:06, Owen DeLong wrote:
A small probability of abuse is generally not seen as a reason to
deny legitimate users.
I think we can generally count on IXPs not to distribute large
portions of their resources to cache providers that do not bring
significant value to the users of the IX with those resources. To
the best of my knowledge, there is no problem of abuse to date. As
such, I think your concern here has about as much credibility as
those crying about election fraud in the US.
Owen
On Apr 18, 2024, at 22:31, Fernando Frediani <[email protected]>
wrote:
By doing this it creates a short path to some specific type of
Internet companies over the others to have access to scarce
resources via someone else's right (the IX) to request those
addresses for the minimum necessary to setup an IX, not to 'give a
hand' to third parties. It would start to distort the purpose of
the pool.
Content providers members are members like any other connected to
that IX. Why make them special to use these resources if other
members (e.g: Broadband Internet Service Providers) connected to
that same IX cannot have the same privilege ?
They and any other IX member, regardless of their business, can get
their own allocations with their own resources.
Fernando
On 19/04/2024 02:13, Owen DeLong wrote:
I think that if it’s a cache that is serving the IX (i.e. the IX
member networks) over the IX peering VLAN, that’s perfectly valid.
Owen
On Apr 18, 2024, at 20:35, Fernando Frediani
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 18/04/2024 21:34, Matt Peterson wrote:
<clip>
If the policy needs revision /(John's comments did not provide
enough of a background story - it's unclear if this a yet
another IPv4 land grab approach, and/or IXP's evolving into
hosting content caches, and/or the historical industry
acceptable usage that Ryan shares), /maybe consider
micro-allocations for IXP usage as unannounced prefixes and for
routed prefixes, an IXP applies under NRPM 4.3 /(end user
assignments).
/
I have a similar conversation recently with someone willing to
use IXP allocations to assign to content caches and on this point
I think that IXP pool should not be for that. Even knowing the
positive impact a hosted content directly connected to a IXP
makes it is their business to being their own IP address not the
IXP and to be fair if you think of any CDN service they all have
total means to do that. Therefore IXP allocations should be used
for IXP own usage, so internal Infrastructure and to connect
members and things should not be mixed up.
Regards
Fernando
--Matt
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
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:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
