[ppml] Proposed Policy: Adding an HD ratio choice for new IPv4 allocations

[Owen DeLong]

Actually, the Allocation section should be rewritten to replace
the ambiguous and meaningless term ISP with the defined and registry-
relevant term LIR, in my opinion.

I do not believe the term LIR is RIPE specific, as it is included
in RFCs and other IETF working group documents, and, in fact is
defined in the NRPM (note: not NPRM) at section 2.4.

Since the NRPM defines LIR and does not define ISP, I believe that
it is a clerical correction to s/ISP/LIR/g in the NRPM, but, I will
leave that to the judgment of Einar, the AC, and the BOT.

Again, assignments are, by definition to Organizations, and, allocations
are, by definition to LIRs or NIRs.  I don't believe there are currently
any NIRs within ARIN, but, even if there are, ISP would not encompass
them correctly, anyway.

Owen


--On Tuesday, February 22, 2005 1:15 PM +0000 Michael.Dillon at radianz.com 
wrote:

>> The correct solution is to replace the term ISP with the term LIR for
>> allocations and the term Organization for asignments.
>
> In my proposal I used the term "organization" because
> the context was already set by the section title,
> 4.2.  Allocations to ISPs
>
> However, the existing section 4.2.4.1 did use the
> term ISP and I kept this in the interest of making
> minimal changes to the current wording of this
> section. I only changed the words needed to accomodate
> the HD ratio and left the rest, including the term
> ISP, unchanged. This leaves open the possibility
> that at some later date, we could insert a clause
> elsewhere in the NPRM that says
>
>     "Organizations classed as ???? must meet
>      the requirements of sections 4.2.4.1.1
>      through 4.2.4.1.5 inclusive, when applying
>      for additional address space."
>
> I do agree that it would be a good idea to
> have a definition of the term ISP in the NPRM.
> My sense is that ISP refers to any organization
> that receives an allocation from ARIN and it is
> therefore identical to the RIPE term LIR.
>
> However, this should be done elsewhere in the
> NPRM, not in the Allocation to ISP's section.
>
> --Michael Dillon
>



-- 
If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20050222/a6bf68fb/attachment.sig>