- Test - lists.nanog.org

NANOG and ARIN
by Jim Fleming 18 May '98

18 May '98

How come all of these discussions about ARIN are not on the ARIN mailing list(s) ? Could it be because some of the ARIN mailing lists are not available to the public ? Why is that...? Or...Is it because these are really IANA discussions and there is not a public IANA discussion list ? Will that be one of the first things that the new IANA Inc. does...??...(i.e. create an open discussion list)... === By the way...since there appears to be interest from NANOG members in these topics....here is my 2 cents... 1. People have been suggesting for years that /19 allocations should be easy to get and totally free of subjective decision making. I and others have suggested that TWO signed affidavits from upstream providers that will be providing the ISP with at least DS1 connections should be all that is required to obtain the allocation. If the ISP goes out of business, the registry gets to recover a larger block that can be easily recycled. Having many different sizes costs more in administrative costs and requires companies like ARIN to spend more money and therefore charge more. 2. It should be clear to everyone that the IPv4 address space is a mess and the IPv4 core transport network will eventually be replaced. There are a variety of strategies for how to do this. Which protocol is used is not the major issue. The Address Management Plan is more critical. The IPv4 plan is the result of years of strife, there is no IPv6 plan, and the IPv8 plan is oriented toward the ideas that some NANOG members have expressed here about NAT and RFC 1918 10.x.x.x networks behind proxy/firewalls. It is encouraging to see that NANOG members are moving in that direction. It is a shame they are being forced there because the IPv4 policies are so onerous and biased toward large telcos, ISPs and the regional registries like ARIN, RIPE and APNIC who are taxing everyone with millions of dollars in fees for a very minimal service. - Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.net IPv8 - Designed for the Rest of the Human Race AM Radio Stations ---> http://www.DOT.AM

3 2

Re: ARIN allocating /20 netblocks?
by owen＠DeLong.SJ.CA.US 18 May '98

18 May '98

> > agency). Renumbering THEM would be a job out of the depths of Hades > > itself; even broaching the subject would likely cost us the account. > > I see. So if you tell the customer that they need to renumber, then they > tell you to stuff it and switch to a new provider who... tells them that > they must renumber out of your soon-to-be-reassigned address space. > > I just don't see this as a realistic example of a situation in which a > renumbering ISP is at a severe business disadvantage. In fact I can't > remember ever seeing any such realistic example nor do I ever remember > hearing of a case in which an ISP lost a significant amount of business > because of renumbering. > The example above is realistic, and they go to the next provider saying "we know we have to renumber this time, but we want space we won't have to ever renumber again." Guess what.... There are some larger providers out there that can (and do) accomodate this type of customer. As a result, smaller providers are on the losing end of this. It's real. Owen

1 0

ARIN allocating /20 netblocks?
by Mark D. Nagel 18 May '98

18 May '98

One of our customers was recently allocated a /20 netblock from ARIN. I had just been ass-u-ming it was a /19 until I cross-checked our announcement update with the request from the customer. Is this a change in policy (I thought they only allocated /19 or bigger) or did I miss something? If the former, are NSPs like Sprint planning to update filters to route these new smaller blocks? Mark -- Mark D. Nagel <nagel(a)intelenet.net>, CCIE #3177 in|tele|net communications; 18101 Von Karman Ave, St 550; Irvine, CA 92612 949/851-8250, 949/851-1088 FAX, http://www.intelenet.net/ Cisco Systems Silver Certified Partner

12 20

cpu impact of netflow export ?
by Dave Curado 18 May '98

18 May '98

Does anyone have any data points they'd share regarding the impact of netflow export on cpu load? I'd like to capture all of my netflow stats, but I'm worried about scalability. Thanks, davec

2 1

Re: NANOG and the USG Ex-Parte Rules
by Hank Nussbacher 18 May '98

18 May '98

At 02:04 PM 5/17/98 -0500, Jim Fleming wrote: NANOG is supposed to be be a "controlled" list - can't the owner remove posting privs for Jim? -Hank > >NANOG is supported by Merit > and Merit is supported by the NSF > and the NSF is supported by the U.S. Government > and the U.S. Government is supported by U.S. taxpayers... > >This makes NANOG conversations about Internet Governance >topics subject to the Ex-Parte rules of the U.S. Government. > >I will try to include the right CCs so that the NTIA's web site >can be up to date. > >http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/ > > >- >Jim Fleming >Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.net >IPv8 - Designed for the Rest of the Human Race >AM Radio Stations ---> http://www.DOT.AM > >

2 1

Re: ARIN allocating /20 netblocks?
by shields＠crosslink.net 18 May '98

18 May '98

In article <Pine.GSO.3.96.980517144158.13470A-100000(a)chele.cais.com>, Blake Willis <blakew(a)cais.net> wrote: > IMHO every dialup customer, the vast majority of which use Windows 95, > should have their machines set up to get the DNS servers, routing info, > etc. from the terminal server they dial in to. This would be ok if the dialup users used DHCP, but instead they only seem to be able to use the layering violation that Microsoft calls a PPP "extension". -- Shields, CrossLink.

1 0

RE: ARIN allocating /20 netblocks?
by Jim Fleming 18 May '98

18 May '98

On Friday, May 15, 1998 11:57 PM, Chris A. Icide[SMTP:chris@abs.net] wrote: @At 08:59 PM 5/15/98 -0400, Kim Hubbard wrote: @>> @>> Jeremiah Kristal wrote: @ @<snip> @ @>> ARIN has made a slight change to make it easier for them to make more @>> money by allowing anyone to register for IPs. They will assign a /20 and @>> reserve the adjacent /20... @>> @ @<snip> @ @>ARIN just can't win with some people :-) If we don't change policy, we're @>evil....if we do, we're greedy. *sigh* @> @ @If I remember correctly (someone correct me if I'm wrong here), ARIN is a @Non-profit organization. This classification generally means something to @the effect that they can't make more money. @ It is not clear that ARIN can continue to qualify as a non-profit company because they are engaged in an activity that other companies carry on for-profit. Also, as you can see here, break-even does not define non-profit. http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/prod/bus_info/eo/index.html http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/prod/bus_info/eo/bus-orgs.html @@@@ http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/prod/bus_info/eo/bl-req.html "No part of its net earnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual and it may not be organized for profit or organized to engage in an activity ordinarily carried on for profit (even if the business is operated on a cooperative basis or produces only sufficient income to be self-sustaining)." @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @So, if they begin taking in more revenues due to an increased use of thier @services, they must either spend those revenues, or reduce the price of the @services. @ @Of course increased usage might mean that they may have to add more @hardware/Software/People, etc. @ @<here is where I may be seriously wrong, however....> @ @I do believe that members have a say into how this is resolved, by acting @through one of the governing boards? @ @ @-Chris @ I suggest that you review some actual results from APNIC which ARIN was supposedly modeled from. ARIN seems reluctant to post any real financial information. http://teckla.apnic.net/annual_reports/1997/resource_status.htm#c4_1 http://teckla.apnic.net/annual_reports/1997/financial_status.htm#c3_3 After reviewing this information it should be clear that a non-profit can spend a lot of money on salaries, travel and other expenses (such as $50,000 to the IANA) to offset income. Also, in the case of APNIC, money was spent to subsidize the APRICOT trade-show and people in the Registry Industry were paid via that vehicle, yet APNIC claims it is non-profit (or at least it was). APNIC is now planning to move to Australia and it appears will be for-profit. If you would like to make an estimate of ARIN's revenues here is more information. @http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/imr/ @ARIN Status Report @------------------ @ @ January February March @ @ /24's Issued 2176 3265 5547 @ ASNs Issued 26 60 85 @ Estimated First Quarter Totals /24s - 10,988 - $858,437 ASNs - 171 - $85,500 Total Estimated Revenue - $943,937 This is based on 32 /24s for $2,500 and $500 per ASN. No $1,000 membership fees are included. With 16 employees, this amounts to $58,996 revenue per employee. Assuming no growth, that is $235,984 per employee on an annual basis. ===== - Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.net IPv8 - Designed for the Rest of the Human Race AM Radio Stations ---> http://www.DOT.AM

1 0

NANOG and the USG Ex-Parte Rules
by Jim Fleming 18 May '98

18 May '98

NANOG is supported by Merit and Merit is supported by the NSF and the NSF is supported by the U.S. Government and the U.S. Government is supported by U.S. taxpayers... This makes NANOG conversations about Internet Governance topics subject to the Ex-Parte rules of the U.S. Government. I will try to include the right CCs so that the NTIA's web site can be up to date. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/domainname/130dftmail/ - Jim Fleming Unir Corporation - http://www.unir.net IPv8 - Designed for the Rest of the Human Race AM Radio Stations ---> http://www.DOT.AM

3 2

RE: ARIN allocating /20 netblocks?
by Sean M. Doran 17 May '98

17 May '98

| ISPs should be | advising their customers to be prepared for renumbering since it is in the | customer's best interests. One of the ironies in many of these discussions is that ISPs are very keen on not having to renumber their customers if they themselves have to switch providers, therefore they should get sizable address allocations that are liklier to be portable. Yet, any customer of theirs is then instantly in the same position: if an end user wants to switch ISPs, unless it has portable address space, the end user has to renumber. Few tears are cried here over that (modulo Eliot Lear). That said, I see no reason to be fair and even-handed just for the sake of seeming to be "nice". Otherwise, we degenerate into Bill Manning's "constant renumbering" Internet [*], running out of addresses through allocation of too-large blocks, or reversing CIDR and putting an end to hierarchical routing [**]. Therefore, a minimum allocation unit, which has a "price", either in terms of actual dollars paid to a RIPE-like registry or in terms of a set of requirements set out by such a registry (or both), where the price is unattractive to end users is a reasonable solution. Sean. P.S.: [*] one fun and useful thing to think about is what would break if every device in the Internet (routers and hosts) were to be shut down and brought back up, with or without new addresses. [**] hierarchical routing is the only known means of maintaining adequate routing in an enormous growing network.

2 1

RE: Topology (Flow chart) drawing program
by Michael J. Freeman 17 May '98

17 May '98

Visio 4. -----Original Message----- From: Geoff White [SMTP:geoffw@precipice.v-site.net] Sent: Sunday, May 17, 1998 1:58 PM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: Topology (Flow chart) drawing program Does anyone know of a flow chart program that I can use to diagram parts of my network in ASCII. (i.e to e-mail a description to someonme) I should be able to type in a description (that shows up in the block) and then specify links to other blocks, the program outputs an ASCII block diagram suitable for putting into documents. Im sure someone must have written something like this when they were back in undergrad :) geoff white

1 0