[arin-ppml] ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 95, Issue 7
David Lundy
dlundy at PACIFIC.EDU
Fri May 17 17:06:52 EDT 2013
-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of arin-ppml-request at arin.net
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 1:58 PM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 95, Issue 7
Send ARIN-PPML mailing list submissions to
arin-ppml at arin.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
arin-ppml-request at arin.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
arin-ppml-owner at arin.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of ARIN-PPML digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Advisory Council Meeting Results - May 2013 (ARIN)
2. Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles (ARIN)
3. Draft Policy ARIN-2013-5: LIR/ISP and End-user Definitions (ARIN)
4. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2013-5: LIR/ISP and End-user
Definitions (Chris Grundemann)
5. Re: Draft Policy ARIN-2013-5: LIR/ISP and End-user
Definitions (Jason Schiller)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 12:53:08 -0400
From: ARIN <info at arin.net>
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: [arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - May 2013
Message-ID: <51966074.5040704 at arin.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
In accordance with the ARIN Policy Development Process, the ARIN
Advisory Council (AC) held a meeting on 16 May 2013 and made decisions
about draft policies and proposals.
The AC recommended the following to the ARIN Board for adoption:
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2012-2: IPv6 Subsequent Allocations
Utilization Requirement
The AC accepted the following Proposals as Draft Policies. They will be
posted separately to the Public Policy Mailing List.
ARIN-prop-187 RIR Principles
ARIN-prop-188 LIR/ISP and End-user Definitions
The AC is continuing to work on the following:
Recommended Draft Policy ARIN-2013-1: Section 8.4 Inter-RIR Transfers
of ASNs
Draft Policy ARIN-2013-2: 3GPP Network IP Resource Policy
ARIN-prop-186 Section 8.2 Reorganizations
Draft Policy and Proposal texts are available at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
The ARIN Policy Development Process can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
The AC asked for the following to be posted the list:
"The ARIN Advisory Council honors the memory of Robert Stratton.
The AC thanks Bob for many years of dedicated service to ARIN and the
ARIN community. Your financial leadership, good nature and good humor
were an inspiration to us all and were vital in building ARIN into the
organization that it is today. We are saddened that you had to leave us
and you are sorely missed. You and your family will remain in our
hearts and thoughts forever."
Regards,
Communications and Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 12:53:23 -0400
From: ARIN <info at arin.net>
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles
Message-ID: <51966083.2010003 at arin.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4
RIR Principles
On 16 May 2013 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted "ARIN-prop-187
RIR Principles" as a Draft Policy.
Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4 is below and can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2013_4.html
You are encouraged to discuss the merits and your concerns of Draft
Policy 2013-4 on the Public Policy Mailing List. 2013-4 will also be on
the agenda at the upcoming ARIN Public Policy Consultation at NANOG 58
in New Orleans.
The AC will evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance
of this draft policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet Number Resource
Policy as stated in the PDP. Specifically, these principles are:
* Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
* Technically Sound
* Supported by the Community
The ARIN Policy Development Process (PDP) can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
Regards,
Communications and Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
## * ##
Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4
RIR Principles
Date: 17 May 2013
Problem Statement:
The original text in RFC 2050 both "describes the registry system for
the distribution of globally unique Internet address space and registry
operations" and provides "rules and guidelines [principles] governing
the distribution of this address space."
The currently proposed update (RFC2050bis) "provides information about
the current Internet Numbers Registry System used in the distribution of
globally unique Internet Protocol (IP) address space and autonomous
system (AS) numbers" and "provides information about the processes for
further evolution of the Internet Numbers Registry System."
This means that the guiding principles of stewardship are not currently
being carried forward into the new document. The goals of Conservation
(efficient utilization based on need), Routability (hierarchical
aggregation), and Registration (uniqueness) are as important, if not
more so, now that the transition to IPv6 is upon us. This can be
rectified by documenting these principles in RIR policy.
Policy Statement:
Section 0: Principles and Goals of the Internet Registry System
0.1. Efficient utilization based on need (Conservation)
Policies for managing Internet number resources must support fair
distribution of globally unique Internet address space according to the
operational needs of the end-users and Internet Service Providers
operating networks using this address space. The registry should prevent
stockpiling in order to maximize the conservation and efficient
utilization of the Internet address space.
0.1.1. Documented Justified Need (Needs Based)
Assignment of Internet number resources is based on documented
operational need. Utilization rate of address space will be a key factor
in number resource assignment. To this end, registrants should have
documented justified need available for each assignment. Organizations
will be assigned resources based on immediate utilization plus expected
utilization.
In order to promote increased usage of Internet number resources,
resource holders will be required to provide an accounting of resources
currently held demonstrating efficient utilization. Internet number
resources are valid as long as the criteria continues to be met. The
transfer of Internet number resources from one party to another must be
approved by the regional registries. The party trying to obtain the
resources must meet the same criteria as if they were requesting
resources directly from the IR.
All Internet number resource requests are subject to audit and
verification by any means deemed appropriate by the regional registry.
0.2. Hierarchical aggregation (Routability)
Policies for managing Internet number resources must support
distribution of globally unique Internet addresses in a hierarchical
manner, permitting the routing scalability of the addresses. This
scalability is necessary to ensure proper operation of Internet routing,
although it must be stressed that routability is in no way guaranteed
with the allocation or assignment of IPv4 addresses.
0.3. Uniqueness (Registration)
Provision of a public registry documenting Internet number resource
allocation, reallocation, assignment, and reassignment is necessary to:
a) ensure uniqueness and to to provide operational staff with
information on who is using the number resource b) to provide a contact
in case of operational/security problems (e.g. Law Enforcement) c) to
ensure that a provider has exhausted a majority of its current CIDR
allocation, thereby justifying an additional allocation d) to assist in
IP allocation studies.
It is imperative that reassignment information be submitted in a prompt
and efficient manner to facilitate database maintenance and ensure
database integrity.
0.4. Stewardship
It should be noted that efficient utilization and hierarchical
aggregation are often conflicting goals. All the above goals may
sometimes be in conflict with the interests of individual end-users or
Internet Service Providers. Care must be taken to ensure balance with
these conflicting goals given the resource availability, relative size
of the resource, and number resource specific technical dynamics, for
each type of number resource. For example, efficient utilization becomes
a more prominent issue than aggregation as the IPv4 free pool depletes
and IPv4 resource availability in any transfer market decreases.
Conversely, because the IPv6 number space is orders of magnitude larger
than the IPv4 number space, the scale tips away from efficient
utilization towards hierarchical aggregation for IPv6 number resources.
Comments:
a. Timetable for implementation: immediately
b. I believe that it would be beneficial for IANA to adopt these
principles as well, and encourage the community to consider a global
policy proposal.
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 12:53:35 -0400
From: ARIN <info at arin.net>
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-5: LIR/ISP and End-user
Definitions
Message-ID: <5196608F.1050006 at arin.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Draft Policy ARIN-2013-5
LIR/ISP and End-user Definitions
On 16 May 2013 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted "ARIN-prop-188
LIR/ISP and End-user Definitions" as a Draft Policy.
Draft Policy ARIN-2013-5 is below and can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2013_5.html
You are encouraged to discuss the merits and your concerns of Draft
Policy 2013-5 on the Public Policy Mailing List. 2013-5 will also be on
the agenda at the upcoming ARIN Public Policy Consultation at NANOG 58
in New Orleans.
The AC will evaluate the discussion in order to assess the conformance
of this draft policy with ARIN's Principles of Internet Number Resource
Policy as stated in the PDP. Specifically, these principles are:
* Enabling Fair and Impartial Number Resource Administration
* Technically Sound
* Supported by the Community
The ARIN Policy Development Process (PDP) can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html
Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html
Regards,
Communications and Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
## * ##
Draft Policy ARIN-2013-5
LIR/ISP and End-user Definitions
Date: 17 May 2013
Problem Statement:
At ARIN 31, the Policy Experience Report (slides at
https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_31/PDF/monday/nobile_policy.pdf
or
https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/reports/ARIN_31/PPT/monday/nobile_policy.pptx)
reported that, in ARIN staff's experience, the NRPM does not adequately
define ISP/LIR vs. end-user. As currently defined, and interpreted
literally, many companies do not qualify as either LIRs or end-users. I
would propose that the primary difference between ISPs/LIRs vs.
end-users, for purposes of the NRPM, is whether an organization
reassigns address blocks to third parties. If an organization maintains
full control of all of the equipment on its network, and doesn't need to
make any reassignments to other organizations, then it can qualify as an
end-user. In particular, an end user organization can supply a full list
of all the IP addresses in use on its network, and know what devices are
using those addresses.
An ISP/LIR, on the other hand, should be defined by whether they
delegate that responsibility to another organization. In that case, they
need to reassign the network space via SWIP/rwhois, which makes them an
LIR. Additionally, there are likely some ISPs that do not (yet) need to
delegate any address blocks, but which assign address space to users
(rather than to their own equipment), which should also fall under the
definition of LIR/ISP.
Policy statement:
Update NRPM 2.4 and 2.6 to read:
2.4. Local Internet Registry (LIR) / Internet Service Provider (ISP) The
terms Internet Service Provider (ISP) and LIR are used interchangeably
in this document. A Local Internet Registry (LIR) is an IR that assigns
address space to the users of the network services that it provides.
Therefore, LIRs / ISPs are organizations that reassign addresses to end
users and/or reallocate addresses to other ISPs/LIRs.
2.6. End-user An end-user is an organization receiving assignments of IP
addresses exclusively for use in its operational networks, and does not
register any reassignments of that space.
Timetable for implementation: Immediate
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 21:08:54 +0100
From: Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com>
To: ARIN <info at arin.net>
Cc: "arin-ppml at arin.net" <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-5: LIR/ISP and
End-user Definitions
Message-ID:
<CAC1-dt=Z6Otsy1dDoBjqLxk6uO65QKO6px+q_-wC5FqP75evXQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 5:53 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
[...]
> Policy statement:
>
> Update NRPM 2.4 and 2.6 to read:
>
> 2.4. Local Internet Registry (LIR) / Internet Service Provider (ISP) The
> terms Internet Service Provider (ISP) and LIR are used interchangeably in
> this document. A Local Internet Registry (LIR) is an IR that assigns address
> space to the users of the network services that it provides. Therefore, LIRs
> / ISPs are organizations that reassign addresses to end users and/or
> reallocate addresses to other ISPs/LIRs.
I think this is a bit redundant ('a LIR is an IR') and could be made
more similar to the end-user definition thus:
"2.4. Local Internet Registry (LIR) / Internet Service Provider (ISP)
The terms Internet Service Provider (ISP) and LIR are used
interchangeably in this document. An ISP is a LIR that receives
allocations of IP addresses to provide network services to its users.
An LIR / ISP reassigns addresses to end users and/or reallocates
addresses to other ISPs / LIRs."
I'm also curious as to the community sentiment regarding using these
two terms interchangeably. It seems that it may be more clear to go
through the NRPM and make change to one or the other in all instances.
Would using a single term provide better clarity can continuity?
Which term would you prefer to use if that were the case (LIR or ISP)?
> 2.6. End-user An end-user is an organization receiving assignments of IP
> addresses exclusively for use in its operational networks, and does not
> register any reassignments of that space.
It's not the registration of the reassignment that makes an LIR/ISP
different from an end-user, but the reassignment itself. I think the
following text makes this more clear:
"2.6. End-user An end-user is an organization that receives
assignments of IP addresses exclusively for use in its operational
networks. An end-user does not reassign or reallocate addresses to any
other organization."
Cheers,
~Chris
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
--
@ChrisGrundemann
http://chrisgrundemann.com
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 16:57:39 -0400
From: Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com>
To: Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com>
Cc: "arin-ppml at arin.net" <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-5: LIR/ISP and
End-user Definitions
Message-ID:
<CAC4yj2XEk5Z7E2ry38cQNbvtu4HfLAkiwOMbnJkH_+Ft8a_pPQ at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I know people won't like this, but if you are going to pick one term
ISP/LIR, I'd recommend LIR.
LIR shows up in the other regions, and also global polices.
For clarity I think the best thing to do is use "ISP/LIR" as the single
term everywhere.
I think Chris Grundeman's simplification of ISP/LIR is fine, and his
clarification of end-user is good.
__Jason
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com>wrote:
> On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 5:53 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
> [...]
> > Policy statement:
> >
> > Update NRPM 2.4 and 2.6 to read:
> >
> > 2.4. Local Internet Registry (LIR) / Internet Service Provider (ISP) The
> > terms Internet Service Provider (ISP) and LIR are used interchangeably in
> > this document. A Local Internet Registry (LIR) is an IR that assigns
> address
> > space to the users of the network services that it provides. Therefore,
> LIRs
> > / ISPs are organizations that reassign addresses to end users and/or
> > reallocate addresses to other ISPs/LIRs.
>
> I think this is a bit redundant ('a LIR is an IR') and could be made
> more similar to the end-user definition thus:
>
> "2.4. Local Internet Registry (LIR) / Internet Service Provider (ISP)
> The terms Internet Service Provider (ISP) and LIR are used
> interchangeably in this document. An ISP is a LIR that receives
> allocations of IP addresses to provide network services to its users.
> An LIR / ISP reassigns addresses to end users and/or reallocates
> addresses to other ISPs / LIRs."
>
> I'm also curious as to the community sentiment regarding using these
> two terms interchangeably. It seems that it may be more clear to go
> through the NRPM and make change to one or the other in all instances.
>
> Would using a single term provide better clarity can continuity?
>
> Which term would you prefer to use if that were the case (LIR or ISP)?
>
>
> > 2.6. End-user An end-user is an organization receiving assignments of IP
> > addresses exclusively for use in its operational networks, and does not
> > register any reassignments of that space.
>
> It's not the registration of the reassignment that makes an LIR/ISP
> different from an end-user, but the reassignment itself. I think the
> following text makes this more clear:
>
> "2.6. End-user An end-user is an organization that receives
> assignments of IP addresses exclusively for use in its operational
> networks. An end-user does not reassign or reallocate addresses to any
> other organization."
>
> Cheers,
> ~Chris
>
>
> > Timetable for implementation: Immediate
> > _______________________________________________
> > PPML
> > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> > Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
>
>
> --
> @ChrisGrundemann
> http://chrisgrundemann.com
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
--
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20130517/f96db271/attachment.html>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML mailing list
ARIN-PPML at arin.net
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
End of ARIN-PPML Digest, Vol 95, Issue 7
****************************************
More information about the ARIN-PPML
mailing list