[arin-ppml] Is Emergency action warranted for Policy Proposal 123: Reserved Pool for Critical Infrastructure?
john.sweeting at twcable.com
Tue Dec 14 15:34:13 EST 2010
To All Subscribers of PPML,
Please take time to provide your thoughts on the Proposals that have recently been submitted and may need immediate action in order to really do any good. The only current method to put a Policy Proposal in place immediately is through the "Emergency PDP" and as everyone should be aware, the ARIN Board of Trustees is the only body enabled to use the Emergency PDP. The preferred course of action would be to have the community as well as the AC strongly advocate the use of the Emergency PDP by the BoT for any of these proposals that the community feels warrants immediate enactment. The list of current Policy Proposals that the AC will be considering at its next meeting (Thursday, Dec 16th) is:
* ARIN-prop-125. Efficient Utilization of IPv4 Requires Dual-Stack <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/policy_proposal_archive.html>
* ARIN-prop-124. Clarification of Section 220.127.116.11 <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/policy_proposal_archive.html>
* ARIN-prop-123. Reserved Pool for Critical Infrastructure <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/policy_proposal_archive.html>
* ARIN-prop-122. Reserved Pool for Future Policy Development <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/policy_proposal_archive.html>
* ARIN-prop-121. Sensible IPv6 Allocation for ISPs <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/policy_proposal_archive.html>
* ARIN-prop-120. Protecting Number Resources <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/policy_proposal_archive.html>
* ARIN-prop-119. Globally Coordinated Transfer Policy <https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/policy_proposal_archive.html>
It would be of great help if members of the community would take the time to once again share their thoughts on the following:
Which of these proposals should the BoT consider under the Emergency PDP? And what is the criteria you used to come to this conclusion.
The AC may recommend that the Board consider 1, some or none of the above proposals for the Emergency PDP but it would greatly help if the community at large weighed in as well. I cannot emphasize enough that STRONG community support would go a long way in helping to convince the Board that immediate action is required and that use of the Emergency PDP is fully supported.
On 12/6/10 5:35 PM, "Scott Leibrand" <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
We've gotten some good feedback from a few folks on this in the "122 +
123 process" thread, so I wanted to summarize where we're at and see
if anyone else has any more feedback to the AC in preparation for next
week's AC call. On that call we'll likely discuss whether to put this
proposal on the AC's docket, if so whether to also designate it as a
draft policy for adoption discussion, and most likely also whether to
recommend that the Board invoke the Emergency PDP on this issue.
Do you feel that Proposal 123 meets an emergency need, and that the
Emergency PDP should be activated?
A few comments we've received so far are:
"122 and 123 should be adopted as draft policies and put through the
normal process, at least until
the last /8 is actually allocated." ... "When the last minute arrives,
I would favor 122 and 123 as emergency policies." (Bill Herrin)
"we ought to:" ... "establish via emergency procedures a separate /16
(I would fully support
a /10) for CI as described in Proposal 123" because "b) the sizes of
these two pools are small enough in the grand scheme of things that it
is better to be safe than sorry. c) having two pools rather than one
will prevent a run-out of all remaining addresses for just one of the
two purposes, something that might occur if there was just one pool",
and "we need some space for CI
in situations where even our best planning didn't anticipate a certain
need." (Frank Bulk)
"Emergency? No. That is not to claim that there cannot possibly be
some future action or event that could cause an emergency, just that I
do not see one now." (Gary Buhrmaster)
Additional feedback would be much appreciated.
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 7:01 AM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
> The proposal originator submitted revised text.
> Communications and Member Services
> American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
> ## * ##
> Policy Proposal 123: Reserved Pool for Critical Infrastructure
> Proposal Originator: Martin Hannigan
> Proposal Version: 3.0
> Date: 23 Nov 2010
> Proposal type: Modify
> Policy term: 36 Months following implementation
> Policy statement:
> Upon receipt of the last /8 that the IANA will allocate to ARIN per the
> Global Policy for the Allocation of the Remaining IPv4 Address Space,
> ARIN will place an equivalent of a /16 of IPv4 address space in a
> reserve for Critical Infrastructure. If at the end of the policy term
> there is unused address space remaining in this pool, ARIN staff is
> authorized to utilize this space in a manner consistent with community
> Section 4.10 of the NRPM is insufficient with respect to insuring the
> continued operation of critical infrastructure. This proposal, if
> adopted, will protect those resources with a reasonable amount of
> reserved v4 address space and prevent an overrun of CI needs by NRPM
> Section 4.10 or any successor. The intent is to separate CI needs and
> make a distinct pool available to insure the continuity of CI
> allocations per NRPM Section 4.4 for at least 36 months.
> This proposal should be considered an emergency proposal. IANA
> exhaustion is likely to occur prior to the next ARIN meeting.
> Timetable for implementation: Immediate
> 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:
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
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:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any printout.
More information about the ARIN-PPML