[ppml] Notice: ARIN AC Disposition of IPv4 Soft Landing policy proposal

[Bill Darte]

Hello,

The ARIN Advisory Council at its May 17 meeting chose to 'work with the
author', David Conrad, to potentially modify the IPv4 Soft Landing
policy proposal rather than accept it 'as is'.  This AC decision was
based upon the ppml discussion leading up the AC meeting on May 17.

David Conrad has agreed to rework the policy proposal to incorporate
feedback from the ppml, ARIN staff and ARIN counsel and the AC.

Following was the analysis presented and forming the basis for the AC
determination.

*************************
PPML summary:
In excess of 60 (mostly) relevant postings from about 20 entities (as of
1pm Central)

Declarations:
For - 4
Against - 4
On the fence - 1

Primary points:
Staging provides gradual and transparent increases in v4 efficiency
requirements and v6 engagement.  
Looks to be too many stages given 'new' end-date provided by Geoff
Huston (31 Dec '09) - this view supported by author
Is it even needed, or can it work given current end-date suggested by
Geoff Huston?
Be better to abandon proposal and focus on educational outreach and
'tools' to support v6 adoption
Focuses ISP only - author said he could include enduser portion by
popular demand, didn't seem to be much
'Forces' the investment of ISPs in v6 infrastructure and perhaps
marketing to get new ration of v4 - is this pressure part of ARIN's
charter?
Proposal may need to be global policy with some skepticism that all
regions would adopt same-text policy in (at least) a timely fashion 
Suggestion that ARIN or 3rd party would do a formalized audit with
majority opinion that requester would pay
Cost of audit might make expensive secondary market for IPv4 more
reasonable...issue of auditor certification issues raised
Concern that implementation might cause ARIN to review previous
allocations in light of IPv6 hurdles as part of a reclamation program
Suggestion that if/when edits to proposal are finished, a ppml 'survey'
should be used to get better sense of consensus - author agrees

Proposal as is, has adequate clarity of proposal statement and rationale
and is from an author likely to present it personally
Author also seems willing to rewrite to increase
acceptance/appropriateness

My recommendation to AC:  Work with the author - given the interest in
this topic overall

Considerations to abandon:  Legal issues surrounding audit and requiring
ISP to adopt a technology they are not asking for.  Possibly outside the
scope of ARIN's role of number resource stewards. Impractical if it
cannot be adopted globally in similar fashion.  May be better addressed
by educational and media outreach.
*****************************

Thank you all for your interest an involvement with ARIN public policy
evaluation.  Please continue to express your opinions and suggestions on
how the IPv4 Soft Landing proposal could be modified to make it most
valuable to the community.  And, the Advisory Council will be most
appreciative of your declaration For or Against the proposal as this
helps removes subjective assessment of consensus.


Bill Darte
ARIN AC and 
Policy proposal shepherd for IPv4 Soft Landing

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20070522/50a59139/attachment.htm>