ULA and RIR cost-recovery

Mon Nov 29 17:09:08 UTC 2004

> I don't think this statement is true on its face.  Regardless, if
> it is true the end users have no one to blame but themselves.
>
Agreed... Although I think ARIN could do better outreach to the broader
community.  I think there are perceptions out there that differ from 
reality,
and, blaming people for their perceptions is never effective at bringing
them into the process.  What is needed is outreach and education.

> The policy process (at least for the past several years) has been
> an open, public process.  You don't have to be a member to show up
> and make policy.  The big ISP's do not dominate the discussions.
>
This is absolutely true.  I can vouch for it from the meetings I have 
attended
in the last two years, and, I will say that I have watched ARIN become
progressively LESS ISP centric.

> So, I don't know where your statement comes from.  When end sites
> can get a /22 directly from ARIN so they can multi-home, I wonder
> how we are locking end-sites into their providers address space.
> Since you can get a /22 with a 50% justification you only have to
> show a need for 512 IP's to be provider independent.  I would love to
> know how that is an unreasonable barrier.
>
Perhaps it is because they can't get any v6 allocation from ARIN unless they
claim they want to go into the LIR business and not be an end site and
propose a plan to assign addresses to 200 additional organizations.

> So, it seems like in IPv4 land we're making it quite easy for
> end-sites to get PI space.  It also seems like, even with end sites
> getting PI space, and everyone announcing cutouts of provider blocks
> we don't have a global routing table that's too large.  We're at
> ~140,000 routes now, and that's with the mess of the swamp and other
> poor past decisions floating around.
>
I will point out, however, that if the boundary moves to /24, there's not
much difference between the allocation policy of the past that created the
swamp and current allocation policy.  I'm not saying I think this is a bad
thing (I don't).  I think that CIDR was important in its day, and, I think
it is important today.  However, I think that now, CIDR is only important
in so far as it promotes aggregation where it makes sense.  Deaggregating
where it matters is a valid and necessary thing.

># 3 Drop the absolutely stupid notion that there should be no PI space.
>    There will be PI space, either by people using ULA for that purposes,
>    or by the RIR's changing this stupidity after they get ahold of it.
>
They have ahold of it now.

Owen


-- 
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20041129/261e8725/attachment.sig>