Re: I want my own IPs

["Marshall Eubanks" <tme () multicasttech com>]

Hello Owen;

The original intent was to make it possible for multi-homed ASN to get a minimum
address block (a /24), without any other particular qualifications. There was considerable
debate, as you would expect on a proposal that took 3 Public Policy Meetings 
and 14 months to get through. As approved, it says merely :

------
Address Policy for Multi-homed Networks

Multi-homed organizations may justify and obtain a block of address space with prefix length
extending to /22 directly from ARIN. When prefixes are longer than /20, these micro-allocations or
micro-assignments will be from a reserved block for that purpose.
------

Regardless of Section 4.2.2.2 may say, the above is what was voted on at the Chicago meeting. Given
the original intent of 2002-3, and given the wording of it as passed, I view multi-homing
as a strong justification for a /22. Clearly, if you get an make use of two /24 from your
upstreams, you should qualify. If not, it may take more convincing, but it should not be ruled out.

What comes to mind, though, is is this a tempest in a tea pot ? Has anyone gotten a 
microassignment ? What is their experience ? Please send any info to me offlist. 
(One of the points that we kept making about 2002-3 was that not many people would use it
in practice.)

Regards
Marshall Eubanks

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:11:55 -0800
 Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
> Actually, that's not true.  The requirement for a direct end-user assignment
> of any size includes multihoming.  Since RFC-compliant multihoming requires
> an ASN (consistent origin AS), one of the metrics used to determine if an
> organization is multihomed is the possession of (or application for) an ASN.
> This applies to any prefix size.  Initially, there were going to be separate
> more stringent rules for obtaining a /24 microallocation, but, in the
> process of watering 2002-3 down to a /22, most of these additional
> requirements were also removed.  The resulting policy is, in fact, 
> essentially
> identical to the current policy except for the minimum allocation unit, and,
> the specification that /22 and /21 assignments and allocations will be taken
> from a different address pool than the larger ones.
>
> Owen
>
>
> --On Saturday, November 13, 2004 4:38 AM -0500 Marshall Eubanks 
> <tme () multicasttech com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:57:46 -0700
> >  Michael Loftis <mloftis () wgops com> wrote:
> > >
> >
> > The original intent of 2002-3 : Micro-Assignments for Multihomed Networks
> > was to give a /24 to any party with an ASN, as it was possible to become
> > an AS without having the ability to get your own address space.
> > In the year+ before it was approved last Fall
> > in Chicago, this was watered down to a /22. (FWIW, I opposed that.)
> >
> > However, to become an AS means that you have to be multi homed, i.e., have
> > a connection to 2 or more providers. Since it is not hard to get a /24
> > from a provider if you are paying for a connection with them, then my
> > understanding of the intent was that any ASN with two /24's should be
> > able to get a /22. (I.e., for the microassignment, having an ASN was the
> > crucial factor.) This is not the same as requesting an assignment for a
> > /20 or smaller prefix, where different rules apply.
> >
> > If you are an ASN with two address blocks, I think that you qualify and
> > should apply.
> >
> > Regards
> > Marshall Eubanks
> >
> >
> > > --On Friday, November 12, 2004 14:14 -0500 Alex Kamantauskas
> > > <alexk () tugger net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yep, I blinked while going through the small town of ARIN Policy and
> > > > missed it :)
> > > >
> > > > ARIN Number Resource Policy Manual, 4.2.2.2: "When requesting a /22,
> > > > demonstrate the efficient utilization of a minimum contiguous or
> > > > noncontiguous /23 (two /24s) from an upstream."
> > >
> > > I'm still not exactly clear on the definition of 'efficient utilization'
> > > --- in other places it' mentions 80%, but that's only as ISP allocation
> > > and  request for additional space...
> > >
> > > Anyone have a pointer as to the ARIN official definition of this
> > > language?
>
>
>
> -- 
> If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.