[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles - revised

Thu Sep 19 11:04:42 EDT 2013

Right, I just wanted to point out for clarity that for 2013-4 the preferred path is to continue through the ARIN PDP process. And thanks for all the good information (Cathy too).

From: Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com<mailto:jschiller at google.com>>
Date: Thursday, September 19, 2013 11:00 AM
To: John Sweeting <john.sweeting at twcable.com<mailto:john.sweeting at twcable.com>>
Cc: CJ Aronson <cja at daydream.com<mailto:cja at daydream.com>>, "arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>" <arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles - revised

John,

At this point we can only pursue this policy as an ARIN policy as written as we are post Sept 10, and the draft policy text is frozen.

I suspect the changes to make this global would be significant, unlikely to happen in last call, and even if rewritten on the floor at the public policy meeting (which is nearly prohibited) would likely require another cycle to provide the community enough time to review.

What I was attempting to do was jump start the conversation on a global approach such that if a global policy was desired, that would could possibly short cycle the process by sorting out those details earlier on in the discussion.

At this point a group of international authors are awaiting the out come of our ARIN discussion prior to moving forward.  I have also noted that this group is aware of the significant streamlining and rewriting, and have also noted that the LACNIC Policy Manual is more in-line with the original RFC-2050 language that has been stricken.  Discussion of the new language has been tabled until after the results of the discussion at ARIN meeting.

The options I presented in my previous email were options of alternative ways to proceed, if movement towards a global direction was desired earlier in the discussion, and are no longer valid.

I am not suggesting we try to make this a draft global policy at this point (sorry if I created any confusion).  I was rather trying to explain the comment about considering a global policy proposal, how that could happen given the current text does not impact IANA, and that I was trying to get the community to consider the merits of a global policy and if we should move in that direction earlier in the process.

Thanks,

__Jason

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Sweeting, John <john.sweeting at twcable.com<mailto:john.sweeting at twcable.com>> wrote:
Thanks Jason.

One other option, which I personally like, is that we can continue to process as is and then if/when there is a global opportunity initiated ARIN can participate in that as well. That one of the nice things about policy, it can be changed as required.

From: Jason Schiller <jschiller at google.com<mailto:jschiller at google.com>>
Date: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 9:24 PM
To: CJ Aronson <cja at daydream.com<mailto:cja at daydream.com>>
Cc: "arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>" <arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-4: RIR Principles - revised

As written is does not qualify as a global policy nor a globally coordinated policy.

However one could image it *could* be written, such that IANA would also adopt these principles and these principles should be considered wrt policy of allocation of number resources to RIRs.

This would mean two things:

1. we, the global community, should also take these principles in consideration when developing draft global policies.

2. we, the ARIN region community could pass this (now) global policy, and have it not take effect until the four other regions also pass it and the ICANN board ratify it.

Optionally we could craft it as a regional policy that automatically gets elevated to a global policy should it pass all five RIRs.

The comments were a suggestion about the two points above, and a hint to get people to think if it should be written in such a way as to make it global and binding on IANA.

___Jason

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 5:07 PM, CJ Aronson <cja at daydream.com<mailto:cja at daydream.com>> wrote:
Someone help me here.
I am not sure this would qualify as a "global policy" in terms of the ASO MOU.  The document is here
http://archive.icann.org/en/aso/aso-mou-29oct04.htm
I have always been told that an global policy is distinctly one that regulates the interaction between ICANN/IANA and the RIRs.  Like policies for giving out blocks of address space or ASNs by the IANA, etc.

The MOU says this and I am not sure this policy would meet this..

Thanks
----Cathy

"5. Global Policy Development Process

Global policies are defined within the scope of this agreement as Internet number resource policies that have the agreement of all RIRs according to their policy development processes and ICANN, and require specific actions or outcomes on the part of IANA or any other external ICANN-related body in order to be implemented.

Global policies will be developed in the context of this agreement, according to the processes defined by attachment A to this MoU.

Under this agreement the ICANN Board will ratify proposed global policies in accordance with the Global Policy Development Process, using review procedures as determined by ICANN. ICANN will publish these procedures no later than ninety (90) days from the date of the signature of this agreement by all parties.

"

On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com<mailto:cgrundemann at gmail.com>> wrote:

On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 7:21 PM, David Conrad <drc at virtualized.org<mailto:drc at virtualized.org>> wrote:
Chris,

On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:03 AM, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com<mailto:cgrundemann at gmail.com>> wrote:
> This current text aims to document existing practice based on historical norms which best instruct the driving principles required to successfully operate an RIR.

Apologies if this has been discussed before, but is this intended to be a 'global policy' (in the unanimous among all RIRs and ratified by ICANN board sense)?

Currently ARIN-2013-4 has only been submitted in the ARIN region. There has been some discussion of making it a global proposal, which would require someone submitting the same text in all five regions (and all five regions agreeing to the same text), but that has not happened at this point.

HTH,
~Chris

Thanks,
-drc

--
@ChrisGrundemann
http://chrisgrundemann.com

_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto: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<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.

--
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com<mailto:jschiller at google.com>|571-266-0006<tel:571-266-0006>

________________________________
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.

--
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com<mailto:jschiller at google.com>|571-266-0006

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20130919/6002b212/attachment.htm>