From info at arin.net Mon Jun 2 11:27:24 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:27:24 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal 2007-14 Discussed at ARIN Caribbean Sector Meeting Message-ID: <4844115C.3010308@arin.net> Policy Proposal 2007-14 Resource Review Process On 21 May, ARIN held a Caribbean Sector Meeting in Kingston, Jamaica, to discuss active policy proposals in the ARIN region and gain a Caribbean perspective on ARIN policies and procedures. Owen DeLong, as one of the proposal authors, presented the proposal and its rationale. Attendees asked questions about the review criteria, how ARIN will ensure equal treatment among organizations, ARIN's ties to the U.S. government, specific questions on ARIN's current IPv6 policies, and suggested clarification on the phrase "substantially out of compliance." Complete notes from the discussion about "Policy Proposal 2007-14: Resource Review Process" are available at http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/carib_spring_08/csm1_notes.html#anchor_5. The full report of that meeting, which includes presentations and summary notes, is available on the ARIN website at http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/carib_spring_08/. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) From info at arin.net Mon Jun 2 11:27:30 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:27:30 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal 2008-2 Discussed at ARIN Caribbean Sector Meeting Message-ID: <48441162.5020308@arin.net> Policy Proposal 2008-2 IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal On 21 May, ARIN held a Caribbean Sector Meeting in Kingston, Jamaica, to discuss active policy proposals in the ARIN region and gain a Caribbean perspective on ARIN policies and procedures. Leo Bicknell, as Chair of the Advisory Council, presented on the topic of current policy, the history and rationale of this proposal, how the Advisory Council came to author it, and an overview of the text. Other members of the Board of Trustees and Advisory Council also provided other background information for the attendees. Meeting participants asked questions about ARIN's role in setting fees, the possibility of market speculation, and what repercussions would come from transfers made outside of ARIN. Another attendee commented that he did not understand the problem the policy attempts to solve, as IPv6 deployment would be the better solution. Complete notes from the discussion about "Policy Proposal 2008-2: IPv4 Transfer Policy Proposal" are available at http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/carib_spring_08/csm1_notes.html#anchor_6. The full report of that meeting, which includes presentations and summary notes, is available on the ARIN website at http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/carib_spring_08/. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) From info at arin.net Mon Jun 2 11:27:36 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:27:36 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal 2008-3 Discussed at ARIN Caribbean Sector Meeting Message-ID: <48441168.9070408@arin.net> Policy Proposal 2008-3 Community Networks IPv6 Allocation On 21 May, ARIN held a Caribbean Sector Meeting in Kingston, Jamaica, to discuss active policy proposals in the ARIN region and gain a Caribbean perspective on ARIN policies and procedures. Bill Darte, as a representative of the Advisory Council, presented the proposal and its rationale. Two attendees stated their support for such a proposal, with one commenting that it might help to foster the maturation and proliferation of new open source technologies such as WiMax. Complete notes from the discussion about "Policy Proposal 2008-3: Community Networks IPv6 Allocation" are available at http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/carib_spring_08/csm1_notes.html#anchor_12. The full report of that meeting, which includes presentations and summary notes, is available on the ARIN website at http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/carib_spring_08/. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) From info at arin.net Mon Jun 2 11:27:42 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2008 11:27:42 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal 2008-4 Discussed at ARIN Caribbean Sector Meeting Message-ID: <4844116E.1010206@arin.net> Policy Proposal 2008-4 Minimum Allocation in the Caribbean Region On 21 May, ARIN held a Caribbean Sector Meeting in Kingston, Jamaica, to discuss active policy proposals in the ARIN region and gain a Caribbean perspective on ARIN policies and procedures. Suzanne Woolf, as a representative of the Advisory Council, presented the proposal and outlined its specific requirements. Ray Plzak and Leo Bicknell provided additional information about the proposal's history and creation, including that this proposal's text is largely based on a previous policy in effect for the African portion of the ARIN region before AfriNIC became an RIR. Attendees asked for data on the number of organizations that would benefit from this policy. Leslie Nobile said that there have been 34 resource requests for allocations, assignments, and AS numbers between March 2007 and March 2008 and that of those received, about 50 percent were approved. Leo Bicknell asked if it would useful for this proposal to include assignments to end-users. Several attendees spoke in favor of such a revision, saying it would help foster competition and liberalize the industry in the Caribbean. Complete notes from the discussion about "Policy Proposal 2008-4: Minimum Allocation in the Caribbean Region" are available at http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/carib_spring_08/csm1_notes.html#anchor_13. The full report of that meeting, which includes presentations and summary notes, is available on the ARIN website at http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/carib_spring_08/. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) From info at arin.net Thu Jun 5 10:32:15 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:32:15 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal: Extend Experimental Renewal Timeframe Message-ID: <4847F8EF.5070709@arin.net> ARIN received the following policy proposal. In accordance with the ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, the proposal is being posted to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and being placed on ARIN's website. The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review this proposal at their next regularly scheduled meeting. The AC may decide to: 1. Accept the proposal as written. If the AC accepts the proposal, it will be posted as a formal policy proposal to PPML and it will be presented at a Public Policy Meeting. 2. Postpone their decision regarding the proposal until the next regularly scheduled AC meeting in order to work with the author. The AC will work with the author to clarify, combine or divide the proposal. At their following meeting the AC will accept or not accept the proposal. 3. Not accept the proposal. If the AC does not accept the proposal, the AC will explain their decision via the PPML. If a proposal is not accepted, then the author may elect to use the petition process to advance their proposal. If the author elects not to petition or the petition fails, then the proposal will be closed. The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML. In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on this 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. The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html Mailing list subscription information can be found at: http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/ Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ## * ## Policy Proposal Name: Extend Experimental Renewal Timeframe Author: Azinger and Dave Meyer Proposal Version: 1 Submission Date: 4 June 2008 Proposal type: Modify Policy term: Permanent Policy statement: This proposal is to modify section 11.4 in the Policy Manual to extend the experimental timeframe from one year to two years before having to re-justify the use of an experimental block. Rationale: Currently anyone who has an experimental block is required to re-justify his or her use after just one year. Reality shows that any true experiment in technical nature that addresses the internet architecture and routing will take at least two years given the constraints of time and the simple fact of working out what could be a bug in the theory and not a show stopper. This proposal just wishes to extend the timeframe one year so that time isn?t wasted on re-justification. The revision of 11.4 would read as follows: The Numbering Resources are allocated on a lease/license basis for a period of two years. The allocation can be renewed on application to ARIN providing information as per Detail One. The identity and details of the applicant and the allocated Numbering Resources will be published under the conditions of ARIN?s normal publication policy. At the end of the experiment, resources allocated under this policy will be returned to the available pool. Timetable for implementation: Immediate From info at arin.net Fri Jun 6 09:26:34 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2008 09:26:34 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal: Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment Message-ID: <48493B0A.2070305@arin.net> ARIN received the following policy proposal. In accordance with the ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, the proposal is being posted to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and being placed on ARIN's website. The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review this proposal at their next regularly scheduled meeting. The AC may decide to: 1. Accept the proposal as written. If the AC accepts the proposal, it will be posted as a formal policy proposal to PPML and it will be presented at a Public Policy Meeting. 2. Postpone their decision regarding the proposal until the next regularly scheduled AC meeting in order to work with the author. The AC will work with the author to clarify, combine or divide the proposal. At their following meeting the AC will accept or not accept the proposal. 3. Not accept the proposal. If the AC does not accept the proposal, the AC will explain their decision via the PPML. If a proposal is not accepted, then the author may elect to use the petition process to advance their proposal. If the author elects not to petition or the petition fails, then the proposal will be closed. The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML. In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on this 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. The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html Mailing list subscription information can be found at: http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/ Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ## * ## Policy Proposal Name: Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment Author: Alain Durand Proposal Version: 1.0 Submission Date: 6/6/2008 Proposal type: New Policy term: Permanent Policy statement: When ARIN receives its last /8 IPv4 allocation from IANA, a contiguous /10 IPv4 block will be set aside and dedicated to facilitate IPv6 deployment. Allocations and assignments from this block must be justified by immediate IPv6 deployment requirements. Examples of such needs include: IPv4 addresses for key dual stack DNS servers, and NAT-PT or NAT464 translators. ARIN staff will use their discretion when evaluating justifications. This block will be subject to a minimum size allocation of /28 and a maximum size allocation of /24. ARIN should use sparse allocation when possible within that /10 block. In order to receive an allocation or assignment under this policy: 1) the applicant may not have received resources under this policy in the preceding six months; 2) previous allocations/assignments under this policy must continue to meet the justification requirements of this policy; 3) previous allocations/assignments under this policy must meet the utilization requirements of end user assignments; 4) the applicant must demonstrate that no other allocations or assignments will meet this need; 5) on subsequent allocation under this policy, ARIN staff may require applicants to renumber out of previously allocated / assigned space under this policy in order to minimize non-contiguous allocations; 6) recipient organizations must be members in good standing of ARIN. Rationale: Rationale for reserving IPv4 space: This policy provides predictability on how the end game of IPv4 is going to be played after IANA completion. It will facilitate IPv6 deployment by ensuring that some small chunks of IPv4 space will remain available for a long time to ease the co-existence of IPv4 & IPv6. Rationale for reserving a contiguous /10 This is a balance between setting aside too much space and not having enough to facilitate IPv6 deployment for many years. Out of the last /8, that would leave the equivalent of 3 /10 to ARIN either for business as usual or for other policies in the spirit of this one. A /10 represents 4,194,304 IP addresses, If all of them were to be used in NAT-PT or NAT464 type devices with a consolidation factor of 100 users behind each IP address, that would represent about 400 million users. Most networks today filter IPv4 announcements more specific than /24. This policy creates allocations & assignment prefixes as long as /28. Allocating out of a contiguous block will mitigate the impact of this policy on filter lists. Rationale for minimum size allocation of /28 This minimum size allocation will put a cap at 250k additional entries in the global IPv4 routing table. Rationale for maximum size allocation of /24 and for the 6 month delay between allocations This maximum allocation size coupled with the requirement of a 6 months delay between allocations will prevent hoarding and make sure this pool will last several years. Rationale for forced renumbering for further allocation The minimum allocation size of /28 may create a huge increase in the IPv4 routing table size. Forcing renumbering for subsequent allocations under this policy will somehow limit the growth of the routing table size by enabling the announcement of aggregated space. It is expected that the savings in routing table entries will outweigh the pain of forced renumbering. However, renumbering is never an easy task, so it should only be considered as last resort. it is expected that sparse allocation techniques will prevent the need of force renumbering for a fairly long time. Note: This policy proposal hints that the /10 should come out of the last /8 received by ARIN from IANA. However, it does not say so explicitly, leaving the final decision up to the ARIN staff. Timetable for implementation: As soon as ARIN gets its last /8 allocation from IANA. From info at arin.net Tue Jun 10 09:30:54 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 09:30:54 -0400 Subject: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Equitable Distribution of IPv4 Resources before IPv4 Run out In-Reply-To: <48343386.4060700@arin.net> References: <48343386.4060700@arin.net> Message-ID: <484E820E.1060605@arin.net> > The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the > names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML. The ARIN Advisory Council shepherds are Marla Azinger and Scott Leibrand. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) Member Services wrote: > ARIN received the following policy proposal. In accordance with the ARIN > Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, the proposal is being > posted to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and being placed on > ARIN's website. > > The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review this proposal at their next > regularly scheduled meeting. The AC may decide to: > > 1. Accept the proposal as written. If the AC accepts the proposal, > it will be posted as a formal policy proposal to PPML and it will be > presented at a Public Policy Meeting. > > 2. Postpone their decision regarding the proposal until the next > regularly scheduled AC meeting in order to work with the author. The AC > will work with the author to clarify, combine or divide the proposal. At > their following meeting the AC will accept or not accept the proposal. > > 3. Not accept the proposal. If the AC does not accept the proposal, > the AC will explain their decision via the PPML. If a proposal is not > accepted, then the author may elect to use the petition process to > advance their proposal. If the author elects not to petition or the > petition fails, then the proposal will be closed. > > The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the > names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML. > > In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on this 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. > > The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at: > http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html > > Mailing list subscription information can be found at: > http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/ > > Regards, > > Member Services > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > ## * ## > > > Policy Proposal Name: Equitable Distribution of IPv4 Resources before > IPv4 Run out > > Author: Michael K. Smith > > Proposal Version: 1 > > Submission Date: 05/20/2008 > > Proposal type: new > > Policy term: permanent > > Policy statement: > > Upon receipt of the last allocation of IPv4 address space to ARIN from > IANA, ARIN will reserve address space within the allocated block for > Organizations within the defined ARIN Organizational Size determinations > (Extra Small, Small, Large, Extra Large) based upon the utilization > percentages for each group gathered from the statistics of the last two > IANA allocations to ARIN. In order to make the allocation percentages > mathematically feasible, the percentages will be rounded to the closest > whole number and, subsequently, the the closest bit boundary for > assignment the maximum allocation size for the Organization size as > defined by ARIN. > > Once the final IANA allocation is received, ARIN will publish the > allocation percentages that will be used for the final allocation to the > PPML and ARIN website with the necessary documentation supporting the > assignment of percentages. > > Rationale: > > Description: > > This policy is designed to allow Organizations of the various defined > sizes to continue to receive address allocations from the last available > space and is slanted towards ensuring that organizations within the > Large, Small and Extra Small groups (and more specifically, the Small > and Extra Small groups) are able to get additional IPv4 space at the end > of the ARIN's ability to allocate such space. Given the statistics > below, it is likely that Extra Large Organizations would get most or all > of the last remaining space because given the amount they have been > allocated to date. This policy would help ensure that other > Organizations had a statistically equal opportunity to receive space as > well. > > > Example: > > Please see http://www.arin.net/statistics/index.html (Note: the > statistics are generated from IP allocations from 2006 and 2007). This > policy would require statistics to be limited to the previous 2 IANA > allocations to ARIN.) > > The present distribution as of May 20th 2008 is: > > Extra Large: 83.11% > Large: 6.75% > Small: 9.00% > Extra Small: 1.14% > > With this example, ARIN would reserve address space in the final IANA > allocation according to those percentages, to the extent that it is > mathematically possible within the existing range. In order to make the > math work, rounding would give us: > > Extra Large: 83% > Large: 7% > Small: 9% > Extra Small: 1% > > Who is affected: > > All ARIN Members will be affected by this policy. I assume that smaller > providers will benefit from having some space available to them beyond > where they would be with an organic allocation model, and the Extra > Large Organizations would experience some pain because, using the model > above, they would be excluded from being allocated 17% of the remaining > space, even if they had all of the necessary justifications for > receiving allocations from within that space. > > Policy Enforcement: > > ARIN staff will have to enforce this policy and ensure that allocations > stay within the published percentages. > > Financial and Liability Implications: > > Financially, there may be additional resources required by ARIN Staff to > allocate resources using this model. These resources might include > application development, staff training and tracking of allocations > based upon the model. > > ARIN may have legal liability should Organizations that were denied > space according to the model decide to contest the legality of the > policy in court. > > Timetable for implementation: Upon receipt of finall IANA allocation > (roughly 2011). > > _______________________________________________ > 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 the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > From info at arin.net Tue Jun 10 09:33:15 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 09:33:15 -0400 Subject: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Extend Experimental Renewal Timeframe In-Reply-To: <4847F8EF.5070709@arin.net> References: <4847F8EF.5070709@arin.net> Message-ID: <484E829B.4040509@arin.net> > The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the > names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML. The ARIN Advisory Council shepherds are Paul Andersen and Heather Schiller. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) Member Services wrote: > ARIN received the following policy proposal. In accordance with the ARIN > Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, the proposal is being > posted to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and being placed on > ARIN's website. > > The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review this proposal at their next > regularly scheduled meeting. The AC may decide to: > > 1. Accept the proposal as written. If the AC accepts the proposal, > it will be posted as a formal policy proposal to PPML and it will be > presented at a Public Policy Meeting. > > 2. Postpone their decision regarding the proposal until the next > regularly scheduled AC meeting in order to work with the author. The AC > will work with the author to clarify, combine or divide the proposal. At > their following meeting the AC will accept or not accept the proposal. > > 3. Not accept the proposal. If the AC does not accept the proposal, > the AC will explain their decision via the PPML. If a proposal is not > accepted, then the author may elect to use the petition process to > advance their proposal. If the author elects not to petition or the > petition fails, then the proposal will be closed. > > The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the > names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML. > > In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on this 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. > > The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at: > http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html > > Mailing list subscription information can be found at: > http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/ > > Regards, > > Member Services > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > ## * ## > > > Policy Proposal Name: Extend Experimental Renewal Timeframe > > Author: Azinger and Dave Meyer > > Proposal Version: 1 > > Submission Date: 4 June 2008 > > Proposal type: Modify > > Policy term: Permanent > > Policy statement: > > This proposal is to modify section 11.4 in the Policy Manual to extend > the experimental timeframe from one year to two years before having to > re-justify the use of an experimental block. > > Rationale: > > Currently anyone who has an experimental block is required to re-justify > his or her use after just one year. Reality shows that any true > experiment in technical nature that addresses the internet architecture > and routing will take at least two years given the constraints of time > and the simple fact of working out what could be a bug in the theory and > not a show stopper. This proposal just wishes to extend the timeframe > one year so that time isn?t wasted on re-justification. > > The revision of 11.4 would read as follows: > > The Numbering Resources are allocated on a lease/license basis for a > period of two years. The allocation can be renewed on application to > ARIN providing information as per Detail One. The identity and details > of the applicant and the allocated Numbering Resources will be published > under the conditions of ARIN?s normal publication policy. At the end of > the experiment, resources allocated under this policy will be returned > to the available pool. > > 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 the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > From info at arin.net Tue Jun 10 09:34:42 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 09:34:42 -0400 Subject: [arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment In-Reply-To: <48493B0A.2070305@arin.net> References: <48493B0A.2070305@arin.net> Message-ID: <484E82F2.8000400@arin.net> > The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the > names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML. The ARIN Advisory Council shepherds are Owen DeLong and Matt Pounsett. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) Member Services wrote: > ARIN received the following policy proposal. In accordance with the ARIN > Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, the proposal is being > posted to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and being placed on > ARIN's website. > > The ARIN Advisory Council (AC) will review this proposal at their next > regularly scheduled meeting. The AC may decide to: > > 1. Accept the proposal as written. If the AC accepts the proposal, > it will be posted as a formal policy proposal to PPML and it will be > presented at a Public Policy Meeting. > > 2. Postpone their decision regarding the proposal until the next > regularly scheduled AC meeting in order to work with the author. The AC > will work with the author to clarify, combine or divide the proposal. At > their following meeting the AC will accept or not accept the proposal. > > 3. Not accept the proposal. If the AC does not accept the proposal, > the AC will explain their decision via the PPML. If a proposal is not > accepted, then the author may elect to use the petition process to > advance their proposal. If the author elects not to petition or the > petition fails, then the proposal will be closed. > > The AC will assign shepherds in the near future. ARIN will provide the > names of the shepherds to the community via the PPML. > > In the meantime, the AC invites everyone to comment on this 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. > > The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at: > http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html > > Mailing list subscription information can be found at: > http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/ > > Regards, > > Member Services > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) > > > ## * ## > > > Policy Proposal Name: Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment > > Author: Alain Durand > > Proposal Version: 1.0 > > Submission Date: 6/6/2008 > > Proposal type: New > > Policy term: Permanent > > Policy statement: > > When ARIN receives its last /8 IPv4 allocation from IANA, a contiguous > /10 IPv4 block will be set aside and dedicated to facilitate IPv6 > deployment. Allocations and assignments from this block must be > justified by immediate IPv6 deployment requirements. Examples of such > needs include: IPv4 addresses for key dual stack DNS servers, and NAT-PT > or NAT464 translators. ARIN staff will use their discretion when > evaluating justifications. > > This block will be subject to a minimum size allocation of /28 and a > maximum size allocation of /24. ARIN should use sparse allocation when > possible within that /10 block. > > In order to receive an allocation or assignment under this policy: > > 1) the applicant may not have received resources under this policy in > the preceding six months; > > 2) previous allocations/assignments under this policy must continue to > meet the justification requirements of this policy; > > 3) previous allocations/assignments under this policy must meet the > utilization requirements of end user assignments; > > 4) the applicant must demonstrate that no other allocations or > assignments will meet this need; > > 5) on subsequent allocation under this policy, ARIN staff may require > applicants to renumber out of previously allocated / assigned space > under this policy in order to minimize non-contiguous allocations; > > 6) recipient organizations must be members in good standing of ARIN. > > > Rationale: > > Rationale for reserving IPv4 space: > > This policy provides predictability on how the end game of IPv4 is going > to be played after IANA completion. It will facilitate IPv6 deployment > by ensuring that some small chunks of IPv4 space will remain available > for a long time to ease the co-existence of IPv4 & IPv6. > > Rationale for reserving a contiguous /10 > > This is a balance between setting aside too much space and not having > enough to facilitate IPv6 deployment for many years. Out of the last /8, > that would leave the equivalent of 3 /10 to ARIN either for business as > usual or for other policies in the spirit of this one. > > A /10 represents 4,194,304 IP addresses, If all of them were to be used > in NAT-PT or NAT464 type devices with a consolidation factor of 100 > users behind each IP address, that would represent about 400 million users. > > Most networks today filter IPv4 announcements more specific than /24. > This policy creates allocations & assignment prefixes as long as /28. > Allocating out of a contiguous block will mitigate the impact of this > policy on filter lists. > > Rationale for minimum size allocation of /28 > > This minimum size allocation will put a cap at 250k additional entries > in the global IPv4 routing table. > > Rationale for maximum size allocation of /24 and for the 6 month delay > between allocations > > This maximum allocation size coupled with the requirement of a 6 months > delay between allocations will prevent hoarding and make sure this pool > will last several years. > > Rationale for forced renumbering for further allocation > > The minimum allocation size of /28 may create a huge increase in the > IPv4 routing table size. Forcing renumbering for subsequent allocations > under this policy will somehow limit the growth of the routing table > size by enabling the announcement of aggregated space. It is expected > that the savings in routing table entries will outweigh the pain of > forced renumbering. > > However, renumbering is never an easy task, so it should only be > considered as last resort. it is expected that sparse allocation > techniques will prevent the need of force renumbering for a fairly long > time. > > Note: This policy proposal hints that the /10 should come out of the > last /8 received by ARIN from IANA. However, it does not say so > explicitly, leaving the final decision up to the ARIN staff. > > > Timetable for implementation: > > As soon as ARIN gets its last /8 allocation from IANA. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info at arin.net if you experience any issues. > From info at arin.net Thu Jun 12 12:12:38 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:12:38 -0400 Subject: ARIN Mailing Lists Message-ID: <48514AF6.6080903@arin.net> Mr. Dean Anderson's privilege to post and participate in ARIN's various mail lists has been permanently suspended effective 12 June 2008, 12:00 PM ET. This decision follows the recommendation of the ARIN Mailing List Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) Committee in accordance with the procedures in ARIN's Mailing List AUP dated 27 March 2008. Mr. Anderson was previously warned in writing and temporarily suspended for violating ARIN's Mailing List AUP. Additional information and related documents can be found at: http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/aup_comm.html Raymond A. Plzak President & CEO American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) From info at arin.net Thu Jun 19 18:51:54 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 18:51:54 -0400 Subject: Legacy RSAs Message-ID: <000801c8d25f$122e4f10$368aed30$@net> Hello, To date, there have been 92 organizations that have signed ARIN?s Legacy RSA since it was introduced on October 31, 2007. Regards, Leslie Nobile Director, Registration Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) From info at arin.net Tue Jun 24 10:25:12 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 10:25:12 -0400 Subject: ARIN Board Adopts Three Policy Proposals Message-ID: <486103C8.3050002@arin.net> On 20 June 2008 the ARIN Board of Trustees adopted three policy proposals: 2008-1: SWIP support for smaller than /29 assignments 2007-21: PIv6 for legacy holders with RSA and efficient use 2007-23: End Policy for IANA IPv4 allocations to RIRs The first two policies, 2008-1 and 2007-21, will be implemented no later than 31 August 2008. As 2007-23 is a global policy proposal, it will be implemented after ratification by the ICANN Board of Directors. Policy proposal texts are available at the Policy Proposal Archive which can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/proposal_archive.html Regards, Member Services Department American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) From info at arin.net Tue Jun 24 13:49:09 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 13:49:09 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal 2008-5 Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment Message-ID: <48613395.3010603@arin.net> On 19 June 2008, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) concluded its review of "Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment" and accepted it as a formal policy proposal for discussion by the community. The proposal is designated Policy Proposal 2008-5: Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment. The proposal text is below and can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2008_5.html All persons in the community are encouraged to discuss Policy Proposal 2008-5 prior to it being presented at the October ARIN XXII Public Policy Meeting. Both the discussion on the Public Policy Mailing List and at the Public Policy Meeting will be used to determine the community consensus regarding this policy proposal. The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html ARIN's Policy Proposal Archive can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/proposal_archive.html Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ## * ## Policy Proposal 2008-5 Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 deployment Author: Alain Durand Proposal Version: 1.0 Submission Date: 6/6/2008 Proposal type: New Policy term: Permanent Policy statement: When ARIN receives its last /8 IPv4 allocation from IANA, a contiguous /10 IPv4 block will be set aside and dedicated to facilitate IPv6 deployment. Allocations and assignments from this block must be justified by immediate IPv6 deployment requirements. Examples of such needs include: IPv4 addresses for key dual stack DNS servers, and NAT-PT or NAT464 translators. ARIN staff will use their discretion when evaluating justifications. This block will be subject to a minimum size allocation of /28 and a maximum size allocation of /24. ARIN should use sparse allocation when possible within that /10 block. In order to receive an allocation or assignment under this policy: 1) the applicant may not have received resources under this policy in the preceding six months; 2) previous allocations/assignments under this policy must continue to meet the justification requirements of this policy; 3) previous allocations/assignments under this policy must meet the utilization requirements of end user assignments; 4) the applicant must demonstrate that no other allocations or assignments will meet this need; 5) on subsequent allocation under this policy, ARIN staff may require applicants to renumber out of previously allocated / assigned space under this policy in order to minimize non-contiguous allocations; 6) recipient organizations must be members in good standing of ARIN. Rationale: Rationale for reserving IPv4 space: This policy provides predictability on how the end game of IPv4 is going to be played after IANA completion. It will facilitate IPv6 deployment by ensuring that some small chunks of IPv4 space will remain available for a long time to ease the co-existence of IPv4 & IPv6. Rationale for reserving a contiguous /10 This is a balance between setting aside too much space and not having enough to facilitate IPv6 deployment for many years. Out of the last /8, that would leave the equivalent of 3 /10 to ARIN either for business as usual or for other policies in the spirit of this one. A /10 represents 4,194,304 IP addresses, If all of them were to be used in NAT-PT or NAT464 type devices with a consolidation factor of 100 users behind each IP address, that would represent about 400 million users. Most networks today filter IPv4 announcements more specific than /24. This policy creates allocations & assignment prefixes as long as /28. Allocating out of a contiguous block will mitigate the impact of this policy on filter lists. Rationale for minimum size allocation of /28 This minimum size allocation will put a cap at 250k additional entries in the global IPv4 routing table. Rationale for maximum size allocation of /24 and for the 6 month delay between allocations This maximum allocation size coupled with the requirement of a 6 months delay between allocations will prevent hoarding and make sure this pool will last several years. Rationale for forced renumbering for further allocation The minimum allocation size of /28 may create a huge increase in the IPv4 routing table size. Forcing renumbering for subsequent allocations under this policy will somehow limit the growth of the routing table size by enabling the announcement of aggregated space. It is expected that the savings in routing table entries will outweigh the pain of forced renumbering. However, renumbering is never an easy task, so it should only be considered as last resort. it is expected that sparse allocation techniques will prevent the need of force renumbering for a fairly long time. Note: This policy proposal hints that the /10 should come out of the last /8 received by ARIN from IANA. However, it does not say so explicitly, leaving the final decision up to the ARIN staff. Timetable for implementation: As soon as ARIN gets its last /8 allocation from IANA. From info at arin.net Tue Jun 24 14:54:23 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:54:23 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal: Extend Experimental Renewal Timeframe - AC did not accept Message-ID: <486142DF.60002@arin.net> On 19 June 2008, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) concluded its review of the proposed policy "Extend Experimental Timeframe" and did not accept it as a formal policy proposal. The AC provided the following explanation of their decision: "The reason we do not accept it is because this does not address a direct need of the community." During the initial review period the AC may decide to: 1) Accept the proposal as a formal policy proposal as written. 2) Postpone their decision regarding the proposal until the next regularly scheduled AC meeting in order to work with the author. 3) Not accept the policy proposal. In the event that the AC decides not to accept the proposal, then the author may elect to use the petition process to advance the proposal. For petition details see the section called "Petition Process" in the ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process which can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html The deadline for the author to initiate a petition per the ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process is 40 days prior to the meeting; the petition deadline for the October ARIN XXII Public Policy Meeting is 23:59 EDT, 5 September 2008. If the author chooses not to petition or the petition is unsuccessful, then the proposed policy is closed. If a petition is successful, then the proposal will be numbered and posted for discussion and presented at ARIN's Public Policy Meeting. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ## * ## Policy Proposal Name: Extend Experimental Renewal Timeframe Author: Azinger and Dave Meyer Proposal Version: 1 Submission Date: 4 June 2008 Proposal type: Modify Policy term: Permanent Policy statement: This proposal is to modify section 11.4 in the Policy Manual to extend the experimental timeframe from one year to two years before having to re-justify the use of an experimental block. Rationale: Currently anyone who has an experimental block is required to re-justify his or her use after just one year. Reality shows that any true experiment in technical nature that addresses the internet architecture and routing will take at least two years given the constraints of time and the simple fact of working out what could be a bug in the theory and not a show stopper. This proposal just wishes to extend the timeframe one year so that time isn?t wasted on re-justification. The revision of 11.4 would read as follows: The Numbering Resources are allocated on a lease/license basis for a period of two years. The allocation can be renewed on application to ARIN providing information as per Detail One. The identity and details of the applicant and the allocated Numbering Resources will be published under the conditions of ARIN?s normal publication policy. At the end of the experiment, resources allocated under this policy will be returned to the available pool. Timetable for implementation: Immediate From info at arin.net Tue Jun 24 16:26:41 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:26:41 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal: Equitable Distribution of IPv4 Resources before IPv4 Run Out - AC did not accept Message-ID: <48615881.3040505@arin.net> On 19 June 2008, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) concluded its review of the proposed policy "Equitable Distribution of IPv4 Resources before IPv4 Run Out" and did not accept it as a formal policy proposal. The AC provided the following explanation of their decision: "The reason we do not accept it is because there is no community support for it." During the initial review period the AC may decide to: 1) Accept the proposal as a formal policy proposal as written. 2) Postpone their decision regarding the proposal until the next regularly scheduled AC meeting in order to work with the author. 3) Not accept the policy proposal. In the event that the AC decides not to accept the proposal, then the author may elect to use the petition process to advance the proposal. For petition details see the section called "Petition Process" in the ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process which can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html The deadline for the author to initiate a petition per the ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process is 40 days prior to the meeting; the petition deadline for the October ARIN XXII Public Policy Meeting is 23:59 EDT, 5 September 2008. If the author chooses not to petition or the petition is unsuccessful, then the proposed policy is closed. If a petition is successful, then the proposal will be numbered and posted for discussion and presented at ARIN's Public Policy Meeting. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ## * ## Policy Proposal Name: Equitable Distribution of IPv4 Resources before IPv4 Run out Author: Michael K. Smith Proposal Version: 1 Submission Date: 05/20/2008 Proposal type: new Policy term: permanent Policy statement: Upon receipt of the last allocation of IPv4 address space to ARIN from IANA, ARIN will reserve address space within the allocated block for Organizations within the defined ARIN Organizational Size determinations (Extra Small, Small, Large, Extra Large) based upon the utilization percentages for each group gathered from the statistics of the last two IANA allocations to ARIN. In order to make the allocation percentages mathematically feasible, the percentages will be rounded to the closest whole number and, subsequently, the the closest bit boundary for assignment the maximum allocation size for the Organization size as defined by ARIN. Once the final IANA allocation is received, ARIN will publish the allocation percentages that will be used for the final allocation to the PPML and ARIN website with the necessary documentation supporting the assignment of percentages. Rationale: Description: This policy is designed to allow Organizations of the various defined sizes to continue to receive address allocations from the last available space and is slanted towards ensuring that organizations within the Large, Small and Extra Small groups (and more specifically, the Small and Extra Small groups) are able to get additional IPv4 space at the end of the ARIN's ability to allocate such space. Given the statistics below, it is likely that Extra Large Organizations would get most or all of the last remaining space because given the amount they have been allocated to date. This policy would help ensure that other Organizations had a statistically equal opportunity to receive space as well. Example: Please see http://www.arin.net/statistics/index.html (Note: the statistics are generated from IP allocations from 2006 and 2007). This policy would require statistics to be limited to the previous 2 IANA allocations to ARIN.) The present distribution as of May 20th 2008 is: Extra Large: 83.11% Large: 6.75% Small: 9.00% Extra Small: 1.14% With this example, ARIN would reserve address space in the final IANA allocation according to those percentages, to the extent that it is mathematically possible within the existing range. In order to make the math work, rounding would give us: Extra Large: 83% Large: 7% Small: 9% Extra Small: 1% Who is affected: All ARIN Members will be affected by this policy. I assume that smaller providers will benefit from having some space available to them beyond where they would be with an organic allocation model, and the Extra Large Organizations would experience some pain because, using the model above, they would be excluded from being allocated 17% of the remaining space, even if they had all of the necessary justifications for receiving allocations from within that space. Policy Enforcement: ARIN staff will have to enforce this policy and ensure that allocations stay within the published percentages. Financial and Liability Implications: Financially, there may be additional resources required by ARIN Staff to allocate resources using this model. These resources might include application development, staff training and tracking of allocations based upon the model. ARIN may have legal liability should Organizations that were denied space according to the model decide to contest the legality of the policy in court. Timetable for implementation: Upon receipt of finall IANA allocation (roughly 2011).