[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Policy for Allocation of ASN Blocks (ASNs) to Regional Internet Registries

Scott Leibrand scottleibrand at gmail.com
Mon Jun 1 12:19:51 EDT 2009 

I agree, but I don't think there's any benefit to using our emergency  
process, as we'd just end up waiting on other RIRs. If we pass it this  
fall, and other RIRs do likewise, the policy supporters can focus  
their efforts on getting the ASO AC and ICANN to move quickly, and we  
should have something in early 2010.

-Scott

On Jun 1, 2009, at 10:52 AM, David Williamson <dlw+arin at tellme.com>  
wrote:

> I support the policy as written.  I think Owen has a great idea, but
> the timeline is a problem for changes.  It would be possible to  
> start a
> new policy to correct this one with Owen's suggested changes, but  
> let's
> fast track this one *as is*.
>
> I'd even support this as written if it was declared to be a Board
> response to an emergency.  Unless there are compelling arguments in
> dissent, this should simply move forward.
>
> -David
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 03:01:35PM -0500, Scott Leibrand wrote:
>> One thing to keep in mind here is that, because this is a Global  
>> Policy,
>> and because of the extremely tight timeframe, we need to agree on the
>> text of the proposal right away, and make sure the same text gets put
>> forward in each region.  Even if everyone approves it their first  
>> time
>> around, and LACNIC approves it through their fast-track process  
>> (since
>> it'll be exactly a year until their next meeting), we're still  
>> looking
>> at sometime in 2010 before the policy can be ratified by the ASO-AC  
>> and
>> ICANN.  That will mean we will have several months (at least) of RIRs
>> being unable to get more 16-bit ASNs from the IANA before this policy
>> could go through and make it possible again.  I've heard some very  
>> good
>> arguments in the last week that the simpler we make the change, the  
>> less
>> likely we are to run into problems that cause delays in getting this
>> approved in time for it to be useful...
>>
>> How important do you think it is to preserve the 16bit/32bit ASN
>> distinction past 1 Jan 2011?  Is it worth the increased risk of  
>> delay in
>> passing such a revised global policy?
>>
>> (As you probably figured out from my comments above, I personally
>> support this policy.)
>>
>> -Scott
>>
>> Owen DeLong wrote:
>>> While I do not support changing the RIR policy on the issuance of  
>>> ASNs,
>>> I do support this policy proposal.  I think that modifying the  
>>> IANA->RIR
>>> distribution rules to accommodate the needs of RIRs to better  
>>> serve their
>>> constituents makes sense. Further, having 16-bit ASNs trapped in the
>>> IANA free pool because 32-bit ASNs are not being accepted by  
>>> recipients
>>> is absurd and poor stewardship. We should go ahead and issue 16-bit
>>> ASNs until they run out.
>>>
>>> I would suggest that this proposal, rather than removing the  
>>> distinction
>>> in 2010 should be modified to extend the IANA->RIR duality until  
>>> such
>>> time as there are no more 16-bit ASN blocks in the IANA pool.
>>>
>>> Owen
>>>
>>> On May 29, 2009, at 8:11 AM, Member Services wrote:
>>>
>>>> ARIN received the following policy proposal and is posting it to  
>>>> the
>>>> Public Policy Mailing List (PPML) in accordance with Policy  
>>>> Development
>>>> Process.
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> 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)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ## * ##
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Policy Proposal: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA)  
>>>> Policy for
>>>> Allocation of ASN Blocks (ASNs) to Regional Internet Registries
>>>>
>>>> Proposal Originator: Stacy Hughes and Andrew de la Haye
>>>>
>>>> Proposal Version: 1.0
>>>>
>>>> Date: 29 May 2009
>>>>
>>>> Proposal type: modify
>>>>
>>>> Policy term: permanent
>>>>
>>>> Policy statement:
>>>>
>>>> Modification of NRPM section 10.3 extending the deadline for an
>>>> undifferentiated ASN pool by 1 year to read:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Allocation Principles
>>>>
>>>> IANA allocates ASNs to RIRs in blocks of 1024 ASNs. In this  
>>>> document the
>>>> term "ASN block" refers to a set of 1024 ASNs. Until 31 December  
>>>> 2010,
>>>> allocations of 16-bit and 32-bit only ASN blocks will be made  
>>>> separately
>>>> and independent of each other [1].
>>>>
>>>> This means until 31 December 2010, RIRs can receive two separate  
>>>> ASN
>>>> blocks, one for 16-bit ASNs and one for 32-bit only ASNs from the  
>>>> IANA
>>>> under this policy. After this date, IANA and the RIRs will cease  
>>>> to make
>>>> any distinction between 16-bit and 32-bit only ASNs, and will  
>>>> operate
>>>> ASN allocations from an undifferentiated 32-bit ASN allocation  
>>>> pool.
>>>>
>>>> Rationale:
>>>>
>>>> a. Arguments supporting the proposal
>>>>
>>>> Due to operational issues external to the IANA/RIR policy process,
>>>> 32-bit only ASNs are not being issued by the RIRs at the  
>>>> anticipated
>>>> rate. As it stands, RIRs will likely not be able to justify a new  
>>>> block
>>>> of ASNs from the IANA after 31 December 2009 due to a glut of  
>>>> free 32
>>>> bit only ASNs in the RIR’s pool. This leaves available, essent 
>>>> ial 16-bit
>>>> ASNs stranded in the IANA free pool. This proposal seeks to  
>>>> remedy the
>>>> potential problem by extending the deadline for differentiation  
>>>> by one
>>>> year.
>>>>
>>>> With this proposal the policy will be aligned with the actual  
>>>> reality in
>>>> regards to 32-bit ASN deployment and usage.
>>>>
>>>> The subject was raised during RIPE 58 and a presentation was made:
>>>> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-58/content/presentations/asn32-take-up-report.pdf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The feedback in this session suggested that a global policy  
>>>> proposal
>>>> should be developed and should be discussed.
>>>>
>>>> b. Arguments opposing the proposal
>>>>
>>>> Some may think that extending the previously set timeline can be
>>>> perceived as some discouragement for the deployment of 32-bit  
>>>> ASNs. One
>>>> counter argument to this is that RIRs and Internet community have  
>>>> some
>>>> other mechanisms and activities to raise awareness for 32-bit ASN  
>>>> pool
>>>> (via public presentations and trainings). These activities will  
>>>> continue
>>>> while 16-bit ASN blocks are still allocated to RIRs by the IANA  
>>>> as they
>>>> are available and they are needed.
>>>>
>>>> Timetable for implementation: Immediately upon ratification by  
>>>> ICANN
>>>> Board
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> PPML
>>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>>>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> PPML
>>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list