[arin-ppml] NRPM Policies 4.6 and 4.7 Suspended by ARIN Board

[Martin Hannigan]

There needs to be a limit on how long this is going to take.

Best,

Martin

On Tuesday, January 21, 2014, John Curran
<jcurran at arin.net<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'jcurran at arin.net');>>
wrote:

>  On Jan 21, 2014, at 3:48 PM, Jimmy Hess <mysidia at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>   On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 2:08 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>
>
>  Does anyone have the rationale for  the sudden removal of 4.6 and 4.7?
>
>  There doesn't appear to have been any policy discussion surrounding
> them,  so the action to suspend appears to be surprising, unwarranted,  and
> contrary to the last known public consensus surrounding the addition of
> those policies. \\
>
>
>  Jimmy -
>
>  Two relevant points -
>
>  1) These policies have been very sparingly used, and not at all used in
> recent years (we
>      haven't approved an amnesty request from 2004 on.  We last approved
> an aggregation
>      request in 2008 - 4 aggregation requests in 2008, 2 in 2007, and one
> each in 2006 and
>      2005.)
>
>  2)  The issue is that theoretically any organization with multiple
> blocks could come in and
>       ask for a single block as large as the sum of all the previously
> issue blocks.  At this time,
>       given the space that has been issued to date, such a request could
> be larger than the
>       entire remaining IPv4 free pool in the worst case, and while we
> would theoretically get
>       back the existing blocks as they renumber out of them, that could be
> a lengthy process
>       (and would ikely still be significantly smaller than what we issued
> them)
>
>  Per ARIN's Policy Development Process, the ARIN Board of Trustees has
> the authority to
> suspend policy and ask for an ARIN AC recommendation if it receives
> credible information
> that a policy is flawed in such a way that it may cause significant
> problems if it continues to
> be followed.  I supplied the above information to the ARIN Board with full
> belief that the
> policy poses the risk of significant problems (contrary to the community's
> intent and desire
> for these policies) if it remained in force and was exercised at the
> present time by any of the
> larger service providers in the region.  If the folks feel that such use
> is appropriate (i.e. a large
> provider requesting the remainder of the ARIN IPv4 free pool to renumber
> into and thus improve
> routing aggregation by a handful of entries), then that should be
> discussed when the ARIN AC
> sends its recommendation to the PPML mailing list.
>
>  Thanks!
> /John
>
>  John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140121/65205bef/attachment.htm>