[ppml] Proposed policy - Defining Utilization of IPv4 address es

[william(at)elan.net]

#4 says that "you must require them" that means you inform them of this 
policy either directly or through your own policies/aup when ips are 
assigned to organiation. It does not specifically mentions that you must 
police them or audit the utilization every time you ask for ips from ARIN 
(in fact this is all part of different policy proposal from Michael), but 
I would expect that possibility of audit should be mentioned just in case 
(ARIN does have that somewhere in their policies, but I never heard them 
do it to anybody unless they apply for more ip space or want to transfer 
ip block).

I really don't see this as being that different then what is already 
being done and the proposal does not seem to state anything new. 
I'm not really opposed to it, if others think the existing wording is 
unsufficient and we better restate it as separate policy, so be it.

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Huff, Mark wrote:

> 
> Yes, but many customers dont come back asking for more so an audit is not
> required. To satisfy the policy requirement, I must know that all the
> assignments made are being used correctly.   
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: william(at)elan.net [mailto:william at elan.net]
> > Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 11:47 AM
> > To: Huff, Mark
> > Cc: 'ppml at arin.net'
> > Subject: RE: [ppml] Proposed policy - Defining Utilization of IPv4
> > address es
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Just about as effective as ARIN itself is. Meaning if your 
> > customers ask 
> > you for more ip space, you check how effectively they 
> > utilized existing
> > allocation. But then again I think everyone is doing this already...
> > 
> > On Fri, 20 Feb 2004, Huff, Mark wrote:
> > 
> > > #4 requires ISP to police there customer base for proper 
> > usage of downstream
> > > allocations.
> > > 
> > > Other than stating the requirement to customers in a AUP, 
> > how effective can
> > > a ISP police the use of IP space granted. Once blocks are assigned,
> > > inquiries to customers for audit of the space would likely 
> > go unanswered.
> > > 
> > > Mark Huff
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Member Services [mailto:memsvcs at arin.net]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 6:00 AM
> > > > To: ppml at arin.net
> > > > Subject: [ppml] Proposed policy - Defining Utilization of 
> > > > IPv4 addresses
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 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
> > > > and being placed on ARIN's website.
> > > > 
> > > > The ARIN Advisory Council will review the proposal and within
> > > > ten working days may decide to: 
> > > > 1)  support the proposal as is, 
> > > > 2)  work with the author to clarify, divide or combine one or more
> > > >     policy proposals, or 
> > > > 3)  not support the policy proposal. 
> > > >  
> > > > If this proposal is accepted by the Advisory Council or 
> > successfully
> > > > petitioned it will be posted as a formal policy proposal 
> > to the Public
> > > > Policy Mailing List and it will be presented at the Public Policy
> > > > Meeting.  If the proposal is not supported by the AC and 
> > the author
> > > > elects not to petition or the petition fails, then the 
> > policy proposal
> > > > will be considered closed.
> > > > 
> > > > The ARIN Internet Resource Policy Evaluation Process is 
> > available at:
> > > > http://www.arin.net/policy/ipep.html
> > > > 
> > > > Mailing list subscription information is available at:
> > > > http://www.arin.net/mailing_lists/index.html
> > > > 
> > > > Member Services 
> > > > American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN) 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > ### * ### 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Policy Proposal Name: Defining Utilization of IPv4 addresses
> > > > 
> > > > Author: Michael Dillon
> > > > 
> > > > Author's Organization: Radianz, Inc.
> > > > 
> > > > Policy term: permanent
> > > > 
> > > > Policy statement: 
> > > > 
> > > > 1. When an ISP applies for IPv4 address space, ARIN analyzes the
> > > >    utilization rate of any existing IPv4 address blocks allocated 
> > > >    to the ISP.
> > > > 
> > > > 2. For the purposes of calculating the utilization rate of ARIN
> > > >    allocations, any IPv4 address range that is assigned 
> > or allocated
> > > >    by the ISP to another organization will be counted as 
> > utilized if
> > > >    it meets the following two conditions.
> > > > 
> > > > 3. The assigned or allocated address range must be of a 
> > size that is
> > > >    justified by ARIN policy.
> > > > 
> > > > 4. The ISP must require the other organization to use 
> > their addresses
> > > >    efficiently, in particular by using VLSM and CIDR technologies.
> > > > 
> > > > 5. The utilization rate of an address block is calculated as the 
> > > >    number of utilized addresses divided by the total number of 
> > > >    addresses in the block.
> > > > 
> > > > Rationale: 
> > > > 
> > > > Currently, there is no clear definition of utilization in 
> > ARIN's IPv4
> > > > policy. The result is that different organizations 
> > interpret this in 
> > > > different ways. This policy change is an attempt to level 
> > the playing
> > > > field so that noone has an unfair competitive advantage due to the
> > > > vagueness of the policy.
> > > > 
> > > > This policy change only provides a clear definition for the 
> > > > utilization
> > > > rate of address blocks allocated by ARIN to ISPs. It does not 
> > > > address the
> > > > utilization rate of address blocks assigned to end users 
> > which would
> > > > presumably be calculated differently by counting end 
> > devices, network
> > > > and broadcast addresses.
> > > > 
> > > > Timetable for implementation: 30 days after ratification
> > > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > William Leibzon
> > Elan Networks
> > william at elan.net