[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-146 Clarify Justified Need for Transfers

ARIN-prop-146 Clarify Justified Need for Transfers

ARIN received the following policy proposal and is posting it to the
Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) in accordance with the Policy
Development Process.

The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review the proposal at their next
regularly scheduled meeting (if the period before the next regularly
scheduled meeting is less than 10 days, then the period may be extended
to the subsequent regularly scheduled meeting). The AC will decide how
to utilize the proposal and announce the decision to the PPML.

The AC invites everyone to comment on the proposal on the PPML,
particularly their support or non-support and the reasoning
behind their opinion. Such participation contributes to a thorough
vetting and provides important guidance to the AC in their deliberations.

Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:

The ARIN Policy Development Process can be found at:

Mailing list subscription information can be found


Communications and Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)

## * ##

ARIN-prop-146 Clarify Justified Need for Transfers

Proposal Originator: Matthew Kaufman

Proposal Version: 1

Date: 2 May 2011

Proposal type: new

Policy term: permanent

Policy statement:

Add a subsection to Section 8 (Transfers) of the NRPM:

"Justified Need" for resources associated with a transfer shall be
determined using the "4.2.4 ISP Additional Requests" criteria applied as
though the recipient has been a subscriber member of ARIN for at least
one year (whether or not that is the case).


An organization which is not able to obtain its initial IPv4 address
assignment from ARIN post-runout would otherwise be limited to
purchasing only a 3-month supply (because the language in
regarding 8.3 transfers is not triggered).

An organization which has only recently received its first allocation
under the "last /8" criteria is also otherwise limited to purchasing
only a 3-month supply (because the language in is again not

There is also ambiguity if is applied in that a transfer to
a new organization might only need to show need for a /20 (because that
is what is specifically called out) even though they are receiving a
much larger block.

There is also ambiguity with regard to transfers under 8.2 where the
receiving organization is a new organization... not at all clear how
"justified need" has been or should be determined.

Timetable for implementation: immediate