[arin-announce] [Fwd: Re: IPv4 Fragment Managemnt policy proposal]

[Member Services]

The following is a new policy proposal that has been posted to the ARIN
Public Policy Mailing List for discussion on that list.

Regards,

Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: IPv4 Fragment Managemnt policy proposal
Date: 	Thu, 29 Apr 2010 11:45:47 -0400
From: 	Member Services <info at arin.net>
To: 	arin-ppml at arin.net
References: 	<8AEAA82D-9BA6-408F-B256-157D61C952CB at delong.com>



ARIN received the following policy proposal.

This proposal is in the first stage of the Policy Development Process.
ARIN staff will perform the Clarity and Understanding step. Staff does
not evaluate the proposal at this time, their goal is to make sure that
they understand the proposal and believe the community will as well.
Staff will report their results to the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) within
10 days.

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

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

Draft Policies and Proposals under discussion can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/index.html

The ARIN Policy Development Process can be found at:
https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp.html

Mailing list subscription information can be found
at: https://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/

Regards,

Member Services
American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)


## * ##


Owen DeLong wrote:
> At ARIN XXV, one of the discussions pointed out that under current
> ARIN policy, after IANA runout, a justified request for a /10 could
> (and would) be satisfied, if necessary, by issuing 1024 disjoint /20s.
>
> I believe there is a need for policy to prevent this kind of
> gathering of the last breadcrumbs by a small number of large
> entities. As such, I offer the following proposal for the discussion
> of the community.
>
> Owen
>
> TEMPLATE: ARIN-POLICY-PROPOSAL-TEMPLATE-2.0
>
> 1.      Policy Proposal Name: IPv4 Fragment Management
> 2.      Proposal Originator
>         a.      name: Owen DeLong
>         b.      email: owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>
>         c.      telephone: 408-890-7992
>         d.      organization: Hurricane Electric
> 3.      Proposal Version: 0.8
> 4.      Date: 2010-04-28
> 5.      Proposal type: New
>         new, modify, or delete.
> 6.      Policy term: Permanent
>         temporary, permanent, or renewable.
> 7.      Policy statement:
>
> Add the following to the NRPM as new sections 4.2.1.7 et. seq.
>
> Each time ARIN approves an IPv4 request which it cannot
> satisfy from 4 or fewer bit-aligned blocks of free address
> space, ARIN shall notify the requestor that there is
> insufficient free address space to meet their request and
> shall offer the requestor their choice of the following
> alternatives:
>
> a. They can have the largest 4 available bit-aligned
> blocks of free addresses.
>
> b. This section reserved -- (in case we implement the
> waiting list for unmet requests policy)
>
> c. They can seek resources through the directed
> transfer policy in section 8.3 of the NRPM.
>
> 8.      Rationale:
>
> When the ARIN free pool begins to diminish, the free space
> will become fragmented into smaller and smaller remaining
> contiguous spaces. This policy attempts to ensure that a
> large number of remaining disjoint small blocks are not
> consumed by a single large request.
>
> While this policy could be regarded as unfair to larger
> entities, it is consistent with the safeguards adopted in
> section 8.3 which require an exact match or full fill
> style of resource transfer.  As such, I believe the policy
> is fair and in line with the consensus will of the community.
>
> 9.      Timetable for implementation: Immediate, although it has no
> actual effect until some time after IANA runout.
>
> END OF TEMPLATE
>