[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-204 Removing Needs Test from Small IPv4 Transfers (fwd)

[Owen DeLong]

In general, I think removing needs basis is an utterly bad idea.

However, if we were to do a 1 year trial at /20, to gather data and evaluate the actual impacts of such a policy, I would consider that acceptable.

	+	Does it actually lead to increased whois accuracy as proclaimed by proponents?
	+	Is there a measurable difference in time required to process requests?
	+	How much time is saved per request on average?

Are there other things we would want to learn from such a trial?

Opening the floodgates to /16 seems fool hearty at best IMHO.

Owen

On Apr 29, 2014, at 7:09 AM, TheIpv6guy . <cb.list6 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Opp
> On Apr 28, 2014 10:35 PM, "John Springer" <springer at inlandnet.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > The following timely policy proposal is presented for your consideration, discussion and comment. Will you please comment?
> >
> > As always, expressions of support or opposition (and their reasons) are given slightly more weight than reasons why you might be in neither condition.
> >
> > John Springer
> >
> >
> > ARIN-prop-204 Removing Needs Test from Small IPv4 Transfers
> >
> > Date: 16 April 2014
> > Problem Statement:
> > ARIN staff, faced with a surge in near-exhaust allocations and subsequent transfer requests and a requirement for team review of these, is spending scarce staff time on needs testing of small transfers. This proposal seeks to decrease overall ARIN processing time through elimination of that needs test.
> > Policy statement:
> > Change the language in NRPM 8.3 after Conditions on the recipient of the transfer: from "The recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of IP address resources under current ARIN policies and sign an RSA." to "For transfers larger than a /16 equivalent, the recipient must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of IP address resources under current ARIN policies and sign an RSA."
> > Change the language in the third bullet point in NRPM 8.4 after Conditions on the recipient of the transfer: from "Recipients within the ARIN region must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of IPv4 address space." to "For transfers larger than a /16 equivalent, recipients in the ARIN region must demonstrate the need for up to a 24-month supply of IP address resources under current ARIN policies and sign an RSA."
> > Comments:
> > Needs testing has been maintained for transfers largely because the community wishes to ensure protection against hoarding and speculation in the IPv4 market. This proposal seeks a middle ground between the elimination of needs tests for transfers altogether, and the continuance of needs tests for every transfer. This should help ARIN staff to reduce transfer processing time, since most transfers have been smaller than /16.
> > Timetable for implementation: Immediate
> >
> 
> Opposed.
> 
> ARIN and the community should focus on deploying ipv6 not pulling the fire alarm on ppml. 
> 
> This is not an emergency. These policies and forces have been around for years.  Clinging to ipv4 is costly. 
> 
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140429/4cff5dc7/attachment.htm>