Merit Network
Can't find what you're looking for? Search the Mail Archives.
  About Merit   Services   Network   Resources & Support   Network Research   News   Events   Home

Discussion Communities: Merit Network Email List Archives

North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Kremen's Buddy?

  • From: Owen DeLong
  • Date: Tue Sep 12 20:36:39 2006

On Sep 12, 2006, at 4:52 PM, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:

On Tue, Sep 12, 2006 at 06:55:11PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
I find the references to alleged, inherent difficulties with the ARIN
resource assignment process increasingly tedious. Even if the
templates were "impossible to decipher", this isn't the forum to
discuss them.

In my opinion, you do the argument in favour of open trading of
addresses as commodities a rank disservice by linking it to this kind
of FUD.
Ever notice the only folks happy with the status quo are the few who have
already have an intimate knowledge of the ARIN allocation process, and/or
have the right political connections to resolve the "issues" that come up
when dealing with them?

I'm not sure I completely buy this.  However, I guess these days I'm
one of the "few" who already have an intimate knowledge.
I do remember being frustrated with the process when I was new
to the process and even more so when the process was new.
However, I can say that today, the process is much better documented,
simpler, and more efficient than it was 10 or even 5 years ago.

Try looking at it from an outsider's point of view instead. If you're new
to dealing with ARIN, it is not uncommon to find the process is absolutely
baffling, frustrating, slow, expensive, and requiring intrusive disclosure
just shy of an anal cavity probe.

I've had several clients who indeed perceived it this way. However, in
each of their cases, I was able to spend a few hours working with them
to collect the necessary information, fill out the ARIN template on their
behalf, and, obtain address space for them in between 5 and 20
man hours. In terms of elapsed calendar time from initial submission
to allocation, it ranged from 4-10 days if you don't count delays induced
by my clients not having certain prerequisites in place on time.
In any kind of free market system, competition would have bitchslapped the
current ARIN way of doing things a long, long time ago. Personally I find
the single most compelling reason to move to IPv6 to be the removal of any
justification for ARIN's continued existance in its current form.

I'm not sure this is true. I think if you compare the ARIN process for getting
IP addresses to the FCC process for getting spectrum, ARIN's process is
MUCH easier. Care to venture what it takes to get an allocation for a
geosynchronous orbital slot? Guaranteed that's quite a bit harder than
ARIN's process. Ever try to get your own issuance of phone numbers
from NANPA or another telephone number registry? Yeah, that's quite
a bit harder than ARIN, too.

Can you please point to another registry for globally unique limited
numeric addresses which is easier to deal with than ARIN?
Somehow I suspect the only folks who wouldn't welcome this are the ones
who benefit from the one thing ARIN is actually good at doing, namely
paying for frequent business class travel and accomodations to exotic
locations around the world under the pretense of "meetings". Hrm guess I
had better offer dinner in St Louis is on me for whichever one of my
friends on the "ARIN travel plan" complains about this post first. :)

while I have not always seen eye-to-eye with ARIN, this comment is
flat out unjustified in my opinion.  ARIN works very hard to provide
an open and transparent governance process.  They put significant
effort into outreach trying to make the process easier and more
accessible to newcomers.  They have made significant effort to
help people gain access to the addresses they need while still
trying to be an effective gatekeeper against unwarranted hoarding
or unjustified address acquisition.

I'm not on the "ARIN travel plan", but, I do find the public policy
meetings a useful forum. I think that combined with the PPML,
they provide about the best possible process for the evolution of
IP policy in the ARIN service region.  If you have a better idea,
let's hear it.  How would you like to see things done?  The primary
difference between whining and constructive criticism is that
constructive criticism includes suggested remedies to the
situation.

Owen

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part




Discussion Communities


About Merit | Services | Network | Resources & Support | Network Research
News | Events | Contact | Site Map | Merit Network Home


Merit Network, Inc.