[arin-ppml] Policy Proposal 107: Rework of IPv6 assignment criteria

[David Farmer]

Michael Richardson wrote:
>>>>>> "David" == David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> writes:
>     Member> 6.5.8.4 Criteria for initial assignment to Community
>     Member> Networks Organizations may justify an initial assignment for
>     Member> operating a Community Network only for the purpose of
>     Member> providing free or low-cost internet connectivity to the
>     Member> residents of their local service area.  By documenting the
>     Member> service area they intend to serve, certifying that the
>     Member> community network staff is 100% volunteers, and otherwise
>     Member> meeting the definition of a Community Network.
> 
>     >> Why does it matter how the staff is paid?  We argued a lot about
>     >> this before.  Did we wind up with a definition?
> 
>     David> 2008-3 Community Networks was just added to the NRPM, two
>     David> days ago, and that requirement is in the definition.
> 
>   Good, I wasn't sure if it happened.
>  
>     David> 2.11. Community Network
> 
>     David> A community network is any network organized and operated by
>     David> a volunteer group operating as or under the fiscal support of
>     David> a nonprofit organization or university for the purpose of
>     David> providing free or low-cost connectivity to the residents of
>     David> their local service area. To be treated as a community
>     David> network under ARIN policy, the applicant must certify to ARIN
>     David> that the community network staff is 100% volunteers.
> 
>   If the definition is already there, then you do not need to repeat it.

Yes, I had quickly added that part to the proposal after realizing 
2008-3 had finally been added to the NRPM and that part didn't go 
through the same amount of refinement as the rest of the proposal.  I am 
thinking about replacing that part with the following text.

----
6.5.8.4 Criteria for initial assignment to Community Networks

Organizations may justify an initial assignment for operating a 
Community Network only for the purpose of providing free or low-cost 
Internet connectivity to the residents of their local service area.

By documenting the service area they intend to serve and certifying that 
the network meets all the requirements of the definition of a Community 
Network from section 2.11.
----

Is that better?

Should the current section 6.10 Micro Allocation be integrated into this 
section as separate criteria?  Micro Allocation have little technical 
difference from assignments.  Or, should we just leave them as a 
separate section.

This one is on a bit of a fast-track to get it ready for the up coming 
Toronto meeting.

Thanks

-- 
===============================================
David Farmer               Email:farmer at umn.edu
Networking & Telecommunication Services
Office of Information Technology
University of Minnesota	
2218 University Ave SE	    Phone: 612-626-0815
Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029   Cell: 612-812-9952
===============================================