[30794] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ARIN Policy on IP-based Web Hosting
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Josh Richards)
Thu Aug 31 04:18:38 2000
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 00:54:16 -0700
From: Josh Richards <jrichard@cubicle.net>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Cc: ppml@arin.net, richardj@arin.net
Message-ID: <20000831005416.A9546@datahaven.freedom.gen.ca.us>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="WIyZ46R2i8wDzkSu"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10008310104151.6070-100000@redhat1.mmaero.com>; from jlewis@lewis.org on Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 01:15:24AM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--WIyZ46R2i8wDzkSu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
* jlewis@lewis.org <jlewis@lewis.org> [20000830 21:56]:
>=20
> On Wed, 30 Aug 2000, Richard Jimmerson wrote:
[..]
> > The policy does state ARIN will accept IP-based hosting=20
> > as justification for an allocation if an exception is=20
> > warranted. ARIN is looking to the community to define=20
> > these exceptions and finds the discussions being held=20
> > here to be very helpful. This information will be included
>=20
> Why would ARIN announce a new policy with completely vague rules? Nobody
> knows what constitutes a valid exception. Apparently, even ARIN doesn't
> know yet. If I were applying for an increased allocation today, who would
> decide if the thousands of IPs that we and our customers have used for IP
> based virtual hosts are a valid or wasteful use of IPs?..the individual at
> ARIN processing our request?
>=20
> > These discussions may create changes to the current=20
> > policy, perhaps by clearly defining a list of exceptions,=20
> > or may even eliminate the new policy altogether. Your=20
> > feedback on this mailing list and at the upcoming public=20
> > policy meeting is important.
>=20
> So a policy was announced before it was fully fleshed out. It may get
> fleshed...or it may get flushed. What was the point? Are you just trying
> to rattle the cages of every ISP in NA to see how many reactions you can
> get?
That is *exactly* my reaction. There are intelligent people at ARIN no=20
doubt, but somebody dropped the ball on this one. If you put aside the=20
disagreements of the who, what, why of IP-based vs. name-based virtual=20
hosting the fact still remains that it is inconceivable to me that ARIN cou=
ld
create this policy without at least going through the thought process of wh=
at
might constitute a valid exception *before* putting the rule actually into=
=20
place. It's great that they're asking for feedback....but why now? W(hy)T=
F=20
didn't this happen before putting the rule into effect?
It makes me wonder what sort of procedures/criteria/training ARIN is actual=
ly
providing to the individuals that handle the approval process.. Does anyone
at ARIN realize that people, their own employees, have to enforce these rul=
es?
In order to enforce antyhing it has to be clearly spelled out. I sure hope=
=20
they're not just expecting their employees to determine "valid exceptions"=
=20
arbitrarily? That's not fair to anybody--employee, customer, or themselves=
=20
(since it makes them all look incompetent).
I do believe the core intent was *good*. The analysis and solution they ca=
me=20
up with is questionable though. And the execution even worse. =20
At the same time, I have this itching thought in the back of my head that m=
akes
me question how much I have a right to complain...being as how I haven't=20
attempted to participate in ARIN politics. My defense is that I'm an optim=
ist
and was/am expecting a certain level of competence out of the people involv=
ed
with ARIN that make these decisions. Perhaps that isn't the correct point
of view for me to have... =20
-jr
----
Josh Richards [JTR38/JR539-ARIN]
<jrichard@cubicle.net/fix.net/freedom.gen.ca.us/geekresearch.com>
Geek Research LLC
IP Network Engineering and Consulting
--WIyZ46R2i8wDzkSu
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iEYEARECAAYFAjmuDyEACgkQ8VgqD3XNPNUNzACgvffLzRE5xaIjyz0BStpLq/I6
h6kAnjOUP+hitNnpRS0P+GhBI9hJHiOr
=OFsz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--WIyZ46R2i8wDzkSu--
