[arin-ppml] Proposal 97. Waiting List for Unmet IPv4 Requests
Scott Leibrand wrote:
> On 12/18/2009 12:15 PM, David Farmer wrote:
>> This is looking good;
>> But I have some questions and comments;
> Thanks, the more feedback the better.
>> 1. The effect of 2009-8, if implemented by the Board, is to allow
>> transfers to be up to a 12 month supply of resources and up to a 3
>> month supply for resource from the ARIN free pool. Does that jive
>> with your intent for this policy? Maybe you should mention this in
>> the rational.
> Correct. After we get to the last /8, you can request up to a 3-month
> supply from the free pool, but only every 3 months unless you can
> document an unforeseen change in circumstances since your last request.
> However, if you get the space via transfer, you can get a block big
> enough for 12 month's need, and if you end up using it up faster, you
> can submit another request after 3 months.
> (Does anyone have feedback on the exact numbers here? Is having to wait
> 3 months between 3-month-supply requests too long? Should I make it 1
> or 2 months between requests instead?)
I think it is fine the way it is, maybe just add it to the FAQ you
>> 2. I believe the way this is stated that an organization with Multiple
>> Discrete Networks is only entitled to a single allocation or
>> assignment per organization, not per network. Maybe you should
>> mention this in the rational too. Does the fact that they might be
>> able to use multiple smaller blocks make any difference?
>> 3. Should resources received via section 4.10 "Dedicated IPv4 block to
>> facilitate IPv6 Deployment" be exempted from these processes and limits?
> I believe that the numbered requirements under 4.10 are all more strict
> than those in proposal 97. As a result, I think the only effect of
> proposal 97 on 4.10 would be that if we ever burn through all the /24's
> in the reserved /10, we would use the same waiting list mechanism to
> deal with further requests after that. I think that's far enough out
> that policy will likely change first, though.
But if you had a request on the waiting list could you make a separate
qualifying request to this pool.
Because of how restricted those resources are, I was thinking maybe you
should be able to get resources from this special pool, if the use
qualifies, without losing a spot on the waiting list for less restricted
And like you say, it should be a while before this policy is necessary
for this special pool.
>> 4. If I were on the waiting list, and subsequently received a transfer
>> via 8.3, would I be removed from the waiting list?
>> I believe that is implied, in the following statement from 4.1.8; "an
>> organization may only receive one allocation, assignment, or transfer
>> every 3 months";
>> But, it might be better if the removal from the waiting list were more
> In 126.96.36.199, it says that "Any requests met through a transfer will be
> considered fulfilled and removed from the waiting list."
DOH! Sorry, I don't know how I missed that, yes you have this handled.
>> So to deal with #3 and #4, how about adding an additional sentence to
>> the end of 188.8.131.52 "Waiting list".
>> "At the time of the allocation, assignment, or transfer of any amount
>> IPv4 resources, except via section 4.10, an organization's request
>> will be removed from the waiting list."
>> 5. I believe M&A transfers are intended to be included a receipt of
>> resources that would remove you from the waiting list, implied in the
>> original text and more explicit with the text above. Maybe you should
>> mention this in the rational too.
> I think that depends on how the M&A is justified. If you acquire a
> company that is already efficiently utilizing all its IP space, I don't
> think that would count toward fulfilling an outstanding need that you
> have a request on the waiting list for. However, if your justification
> for keeping the space held by the acquired company is that you plan to
> use it for new stuff, then that would meet an outstanding need, and a
> request for that same need would be considered fulfilled and removed
> from the waiting list.
That seems reasonable to me
> Maybe I'll create a FAQ in the rationale with some of these questions
> and answers...
Yea, an FAQ would be fine, that way it is clear in the record what the
David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota
2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952