[93409] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IP adresss management verification
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Howard, W. Lee)
Tue Nov 14 18:46:35 2006
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 18:45:40 -0500
From: "Howard, W. Lee" <Lee.Howard@stanleyassociates.com>
To: <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On=20
> Behalf Of David Hubbard
> Sent: Monday, November 13, 2006 11:42 AM
> To: nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: RE: IP adresss management verification
>=20
> What I meant was we require a technical justification to
> give a dedicated IP to a customer but many hosts do not,=20
> or they use it as a revenue add by charging for having
> a dedicated IP when there's no technical reason for it.
> Previously, or maybe still, there was no mandate that web
> hosts only assign dedicated IP's when it can be justified.
>=20
> David
This was the topic of one of the most interesting policies=20
ARIN ever adopted. In 2000, there was a proposal to require=20
web hosting organizations to use virtual hosting (roughly=20
defined as many FQDNs on one IP address), unless indidivual IP=20
addresses were required for documented technical reasons. =20
This proposal predates the online proposal archive, but you
can track it on its progression through the Board meetings.
http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/bot/bot2000_0612.html
http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/bot/bot2000_1002.html
There was community support for the proposal, but strong=20
debate. The Advisory Council found consensus, the Board=20
adopted the proposal, then a few months later suspended the=20
policy. I think this is the only time the Board used its=20
emergency power to set or suspend a policy.
http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/ARIN_VI/ppm_minutes.html#webhosting
On the mailing list, and at the next public policy meeting=20
there was extensive discussion. The Advisory Council took=20
input from the community, and decided that the best policy=20
would be to make it a recommendation. The current policy=20
now reads:
When an ISP submits a request for IP address space to=20
be used for IP-based web hosting, it will supply (for=20
informational purposed only) its technical justification=20
for this practice. ARIN will analyze this data=20
continuously, evaluating the need for future policy=20
changes.
http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four25
To my mind, this is a good example of the ARIN process working
well: the community favored a proposal, so it was adopted, but
there were significant problems. The Board suspended the=20
policy so the AC could get community feedback, and the policy=20
was changed based on experience. =20
If you have an opinion on this policy, you should say so on=20
the Public Policy Mailing List.
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml
Lee
