From info at arin.net Tue May 6 13:10:16 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 13:10:16 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal: Minimum Allocation in the Caribbean Region In-Reply-To: <480F5E60.5060101@arin.net> References: <480F5E60.5060101@arin.net> Message-ID: <482090F8.7030407@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 shepherds from the ARIN Advisory Council for this proposal are Heather Schiller 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: Minimum Allocation in the Caribbean Region > > Author: Cathy Aronson and Paul Andersen > > Proposal Version: Initial > > Submission Date: 23 April 2008 > > Proposal type: New > > Policy term: Renewable > > Policy statement: > > Minimum Allocation. The minimum IPv4 allocation size for ISPs from > the Caribbean portion of the ARIN region is /22. > > 1. Allocation Criteria. > 1. The requesting organization must show the efficient > utilization of an entire previously allocated /22 from their > upstream ISP. This allocation (/22) may have been provided > by an ISP's upstream provider(s), and does not have to be > contiguous address space. The organization must meet the > requirement of efficient use of 4 /24s. > 2. A multi-homed organization must show the efficient > utilization of an entire previously allocated /23 from their > upstream ISP. This allocation (/23) may have been provided > by an ISP's upstream provider(s), and does not have to be > contiguous address space. The organization must meet the > requirement of efficient use of 2 /24s. > 2. Utilization Reporting and Justification. All other ARIN policies > regarding the reporting of justification information for the > allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 address space will remain in effect. > > Rationale: > > ARIN staff have noted that organizations in the Caribbean region have > problems meeting the current criteria due to the fact that the > population in the region is smaller than that of Canada and the US. > There is also a lack of competition with many countries in the region > faced with a monopoly or duopoly situation in terms of transport providers. > > To spur development in the region a similar proposal was passed in this > region for the portion of the African region that ARIN administered > prior to the formation of AfriNIC. This proposal seeks a similar outcome. > > Timetable for implementation: immediate > > From info at arin.net Wed May 7 11:27:06 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Wed, 07 May 2008 11:27:06 -0400 Subject: REMINDER: Proposed PDP Community Review Request Message-ID: <4821CA4A.1040806@arin.net> Your comments are requested on the proposed policy development process! Please post your opinions to arin-ppml at arin.net no later than 5 PM EDT, Friday, 9 May 2008. On 8 April 2008, at ARIN XXI in Denver, Colorado, Scott Bradner presented a proposed policy development process (PDP) to replace the current Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process (IRPEP). The proposed PDP is intended to bring forth clear, technically sound and useful policy; reduce overlapping policy proposals; require both staff and legal assessments before discussion; give adequate opportunity for discussion prior to each public policy meeting; and provide a means of review prior to possible adoption. The proposed PDP empowers the ARIN Advisory Council by shifting its scope from a policy advisory body to a policy development body while providing checks and balances and maintains an open and transparent process. The presentation can be found at: http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/ARIN_XXI/ppm.html and the webcast can be found at: http://www.arin.net/meetings/minutes/ARIN_XXI/ppm.html. The full text for the proposed PDP can be found in the attached PDF or in text below. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ****************************************************** PRINCIPLE ARIN's Internet Resource Policies are documented community decisions that directly determine the rules by which Internet numbering resources are managed and administered by ARIN. Internet Resource Policies are developed in an open and transparent manner by the Internet community. Anyone may participate in the process - ARIN membership is not required. The Policy Development Process (PDP) described in this document defines how policy is established in the ARIN region. The ARIN Board of Trustees adopts proposed Internet Number Resource Policies recommended to it by the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) if the Board determines that the PDP has been followed, that support and consensus for a policy has been reached among the community, and if the proposed policies are consistent with ARIN's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws and with the applicable laws and regulations. It is important to note that Internet Resource Policies are distinctly separate from ARIN general business practices and procedures. ARIN's general business practices (including fees) and procedures are not within the purview of the Policy Development Process. (The ARIN Consultation and Suggestion Process can be used to propose changes in non-policy areas.) OVERIVEW The proposed PDP is intended to bring forth clear, technically sound and useful policy; reduce overlapping policy proposals; require both staff and legal assessments before discussion; give adequate opportunity for discussion prior to each public policy meeting; and provide a means of review prior to possible adoption. The proposed PDP empowers the ARIN Advisory Council by shifting its scope from a policy advisory body to a policy development body while providing checks and balances and maintains an open and transparent process. THE POLICY DEVEOPMENT PROCESS 1. Proposal. [15 Days, maximum] a. Submittal. Policy proposals may be submitted at any time. Anyone in the community, except a member of the ARIN Board of Trustees or a member of ARIN staff can originate a policy proposal. Policy proposals must be sent to the policy e-mail address at ARIN. Proposals can be submitted at any time but only proposals received more than 70 days before a Public Policy Meeting (PPM) can generate a draft policy for consideration at that meeting. b. Clarity & Understanding. ARIN staff works with the proposal originator to ensure there is clarity and understanding of what is being proposed. The staff does not evaluate the proposal itself at this stage, their only aim is to make sure that they understand what the proposal is proposing and believe that the community will as well. If understanding is reached the proposal is announced to the community via the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) and forwarded to the AC. The proposal is dropped if the staff and originator cannot reach an agreement on clear and understandable text. In this case, the originator may make a Submittal Petition and send the proposal to PPML and request community support to have the proposal forwarded to the AC for review. There is no AC action in this phase. 2. Draft Policy. [30 Days, maximum] a. Development & Evaluation. The AC assumes ownership of all proposals. The AC develops and evaluates proposals to only bring forth technically sound policies that make a positive contribution to the Number Resource Policy Manual. The AC may rewrite, merge, abandon, etc.; for example, they may use a proposal as an idea to generate a draft policy. If the AC intends to move a draft policy forward, it must first submit it for staff and legal review (10 days max to perform). The AC must understand and address staff and legal comments before a proposal may go on. These comments may cause the AC to revise a draft policy. b. Selection. The AC selects the draft policies that will be published for discussion and review by the community on the PPML. The relevant staff and legal comments will be published along with each draft policy. If any member of the community, including a proposal originator, is dissatisfied with the AC action on a policy proposal they can initiate a Discussion Petition to move this particular proposal to the PPML for discussion as a draft policy. A successful petition may result in competing versions of the same draft policy. Staff and legal review will be conducted and published for successful petitions. 3. Discussion and Review. [25 Days, minimum] Only draft policies selected by the AC or successfully petitioned are open to community discussion and review on PPML. The text of all draft policies is frozen at 10 days prior to the Public Policy Meeting. The text remains frozen until after the completion of the Public Policy Meeting so that a single text for each draft policy is considered at the meeting. 4. Public Policy Meeting. The AC presents draft policies at the Public Policy Meeting; the successful petitioner presents theirs. Competing proposals, if any, will be discussed together. Discussion and votes at the meeting are for the consideration of the AC. 5. Consensus. a. Discussion Evaluation. [30 Days, maximum] At the conclusion of the PPM the AC owns all draft policies, including those that were successfully petitioned. The AC reviews all draft policies and, taking into account discussion both on the PPML and at the Public Policy Meeting, decides what to do with each draft policy. The AC may rewrite, merge, abandon, send to last call, etc. The results of the AC's decisions are announced to the PPML. Draft policies that are not abandoned or sent to last call are placed on the AC docket for further development and evaluation. If any member of the community, including a proposal originator, is dissatisfied with the AC action on a policy proposal they can initiate a Last Call Petition to move this particular proposal to the PPML for last call. b. Last Call [10 Days, minimum] The AC selects draft policies that have support both in the community and the AC itself and sends them to a last call for comments on the PPML. The last call period will be for a minimum of 10 days. The AC may decide that certain draft proposals may require a longer last call period of review, such as those that were revised based on comments received while the text was frozen. If the AC sends a draft policy to last call that is different from the frozen version, then the AC will explain and justify changes to the text. c. Last Call Review [30 Days, maximum] The AC determines consensus for each draft policy by reviewing last call comments, revisiting its decision (the AC may rewrite, merge, abandon, etc.), and determining readiness for consideration by the Board of Trustees. If the AC modifies a draft policy, it will be sent for another round of last call or may be placed back on the AC's docket for further development and evaluation. If any member of the community is dissatisfied with the AC action on a policy proposal they can initiate a Board of Trustees Consideration Petition to move this particular proposal for consideration by the Board of Trustees. The results of the AC's decisions are announced to the PPML. The AC forwards the draft policies that it supports to the Board of Trustees for consideration. 6. Board of Trustee Review. [30 Days, maximum] The ARIN Board of Trustees reviews and evaluates each draft policy presented to it. The Board examines each draft policy in terms of fiduciary risk, liability risk, conformity to law, development in accordance with the ARIN PDP, and adherence to the ARIN Articles of Incorporation and bylaws. The Board may adopt, reject or remand draft policies to the AC. Rejections will include an explanation. Remands will include an explanation and a recommendation. The Board may also seek clarification from the AC without remanding the draft policy. The results of the Board's decision are announced to the community via PPML. 7. Implementation. The expected implementation date of the policy is announced at the time that adoption of the policy is announced. ARIN staff updates to include the adopted policy into the Number Resource Policy Manual and implements and publishes a new version of the manual. From info at arin.net Mon May 12 10:33:54 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 10:33:54 -0400 Subject: Comments Received on Proposed Policy Development Process Message-ID: <48285552.9060307@arin.net> Thanks to everyone who submitted comments over the last two weeks concerning the new draft Policy Development Process. The ARIN Board will consider all the valuable input as it works with staff to finalize the text and consider implementation details. Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) From info at arin.net Fri May 16 14:50:47 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 14:50:47 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal 2007-17: Last Call Message-ID: <482DD787.2070805@arin.net> Policy Proposal 2007-17 Legacy Outreach and Partial Reclamation On 15 May 2008, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC), acting under the provisions of the ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process, determined that the community supports this proposal as edited and moves it to an extended last call. The AC made the following minor edits from the version that was presented at ARIN XXI in Denver Colorado: * The statement about the Board adopting incentives was taken out of the policy text and moved to the rationale section and will be sent as a note to the Board. Feedback is encouraged during this last call period. All comments should be provided to the Public Policy Mailing List. This last call will expire at 23:59 EDT, 17 June April 2008. The policy proposal text is provided below and is also available at: http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2007_17.html The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/irpep.html Regards, Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) ## * ## Policy Proposal 2007-17 Legacy Outreach and Partial Reclamation Author: Owen DeLong Date: 16 May 2008 Proposal type: modify Policy term: permanent Policy statement: Replace section 4.6 as follows: 4.6 Amnesty and Aggregation requests 4.6.1 Intent of this policy This policy is intended to allow the community and ARIN staff to work together with holders of address resources in the best interests of the community by facilitating the return of unused address space and the aggregation of existing space in a manner which is in the best interests of both parties. All transactions under this policy must either create greater aggregation (a reduction in the number of prefixes) or the return of address space. ARIN should reject any transaction which staff judges is not in the interests of the community. 4.6.2 No penalty for returning or aggregating ARIN shall seek to make the return of address space as convenient and risk-free to the returning organization as possible. An organization with several non-contiguous blocks seeking to aggregate and return space at the same time should be accommodated if possible. If it is possible to expand one block, for example, to facilitate the return of other blocks, ARIN should do that. 4.6.3 Return should not force renumbering An organization shall be allowed to return a partial block of any size to ARIN. For any return greater than a /24, ARIN shall not require that the non-returned portion of the block be renumbered unless the returning organization wishes to do so. 4.6.4 Timeframe for return Any organization which is returning addresses under this policy shall negotiate with ARIN an appropriate timeframe in which to return the addresses after any new resources are received under this policy. In the case of a simple return, the timeframe shall be immediate. In the case where renumbering into new addresses out of existing addresses to be returned is required, the returning organization shall sign a contract with ARIN which stipulates a final return date not less than 6 months nor more than 18 months after the receipt of new addresses. If an organization misses this return date, but, ARIN believes the organization is working in good faith to complete the renumbering, ARIN may grant a single extension of 6-12 months as staff deems appropriate to the situation. Such an extension must be requested in writing (email to hostmaster at arin.net) by the organization at least 15 days prior to the original expiration date. 4.6.5 RSA Required if new addresses received Any organization which receives any additional addresses under this policy shall be required to sign an ARIN RSA which will apply to all new addresses issued and to any retained blocks which are expanded under this policy. 4.6.6 Annual contact required Any organization which participates in this policy shall be required to sign an agreement stipulating that ARIN will attempt contact at least once per year via the contact mechanisms registered for the organization in whois. Should ARIN fail to make contact, after reasonable effort the organization shall be flagged as "unreachable" in whois. After six months in "unreachable" status, the organization agrees that ARIN may consider all resources held by the organization to be abandoned and reclaim such resources. Should the organization make contact with ARIN prior to the end of the aforementioned six month period and update their contact information appropriately, ARIN shall remove the "unreachable" status and the annual contact cycle shall continue as normal. If the organization pays annual fees to ARIN, the payment of annual fees shall be considered sufficient contact. Rationale: Existing policy supports aggregation (4.7) and provides some amnesty (existing 4.6) for returning blocks. However, a number of resource holders have expressed discomfort with the current section 4.6 believing that they will be forced to return their entire address space and renumber rather than being able to make partial returns and retain some of their existing space. This policy seeks to eliminate those concerns and make the return of unused address space more desirable to the resource holders. A very high percentage of underutilized space is in the hands of legacy holders who currently have no benefit to joining the ARIN process and no way to return any portion of their address space without incurring significant disadvantage as a result. A suggestion to the board would be to adopt benefits along the following lines for people returning space. These benefits would provide additional incentive for resource holders to make appropriate returns and for legacy holders to join the ARIN process: 1. If the organization does not currently pay ARIN fees, they shall remain fee exempt. 2. If the organization currently pays ARIN fees, their fees shall be waived for two years for each /20 returned, with any fractional /20 resulting in a one-time single year waiver. 3. Any organization returning address space under this policy shall continue under their existing RSA or they may choose to sign the current RSA. For organizations which currently do not have an RSA, they may sign the current RSA, or, they may choose to remain without an RSA. 4. All organizations returning space under this policy shall, if they meet other eligibility requirements and so request, obtain an appropriate IPv6 end-user assignment or ISP allocation as applicable, with no fees for the first 5 years. Organizations electing to receive IPv6 allocation/assignment under this provision must sign a current RSA and must agree that their IPv4 resources are henceforth subject to the RSA. The overriding intent of this policy proposal is to make it as easy as possible for both ARIN and resource holders to "do the right thing" with regard to excess resources or dis-aggregated (fragmented) address blocks. It is the desire of the author that staff make any judgment calls necessary under this policy with that ideal clearly in mind. While the author has made a concerted effort to make the policy as clear as possible and as concrete as can be, the reality is that these types of transactions must rely heavily on the judgment and expertise of the ARIN staff in determining what is in the best interests of the community. Note to the board: The advisory council believes that the Board of Trustees should consider creating incentives for organizations to return addresses under this policy. This idea was part of the policy proposal as discussed by the membership, but, we (the AC) feel that it should not be part of the NRPM (fees are not policy matter) so we have pulled it out of the policy and moved it to this note. Timetable for implementation: Immediate From info at arin.net Fri May 16 14:51:42 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 14:51:42 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal 2008-4: Minimum Allocation in the Caribbean Region Message-ID: <482DD7BE.8060104@arin.net> On 15 May 2008, the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) concluded its review of "Minimum Allocation in the Caribbean Region" and accepted it as a formal policy proposal for discussion by the community. The proposal is designated Policy Proposal 2008-4: Minimum Allocation in the Caribbean Region. The proposal text is below and can be found at: http://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/2008_4.html All persons in the community are encouraged to discuss Policy Proposal 2008-4 prior to it being presented at the 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 2008-4 Minimum Allocation in the Caribbean Region Author: Cathy Aronson and Paul Andersen Date: 16 May 2008 Proposal type: new Policy term: renewable Policy statement: Minimum Allocation. The minimum IPv4 allocation size for ISPs from the Caribbean portion of the ARIN region is /22. 1. Allocation Criteria. A. The requesting organization must show the efficient utilization of an entire previously allocated /22 from their upstream ISP. This allocation (/22) may have been provided by an ISP's upstream provider(s), and does not have to be contiguous address space. The organization must meet the requirement of efficient use of 4 /24s. B. A multi-homed organization must show the efficient utilization of an entire previously allocated /23 from their upstream ISP. This allocation (/23) may have been provided by an ISP's upstream provider(s), and does not have to be contiguous address space. The organization must meet the requirement of efficient use of 2 /24s. 2. Utilization Reporting and Justification. All other ARIN policies regarding the reporting of justification information for the allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 address space will remain in effect. Rationale: ARIN staff have noted that organizations in the Caribbean region have problems meeting the current criteria due to the fact that the population in the region is smaller than that of Canada and the US. There is also a lack of competition with many countries in the region faced with a monopoly or duopoly situation in terms of transport providers. To spur development in the region a similar proposal was passed in this region for the portion of the African region that ARIN administered prior to the formation of AfriNIC. This proposal seeks a similar outcome. Timetable for implementation: immediate From info at arin.net Wed May 21 10:36:54 2008 From: info at arin.net (Member Services) Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 10:36:54 -0400 Subject: Policy Proposal: Equitable Distribution of IPv4 Resources before IPv4 Run out Message-ID: <48343386.4060700@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: 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).