[arin-ppml] Policy discussion - Method of calculatingutilization ARIN-2014-17

Wed Jun 25 16:24:52 EDT 2014

All,

Given the ongoing debate and somewhat strong sentiment at different
points of the "needs testing" spectrum, ARIN-2014-17 should be
considered as a solution to some of the problems which are partially
driving the movement to remove needs testing.

I would also like to caution against convoluting -17 too much. Some of
the dissenters are recommending various changes which I feel would
make the policy unnecessarily complicated and in the effort to
compromise, may actually make it more difficult to find consensus.

Thanks, Jeff

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 25, 2014, at 08:42 , <lar at mwtcorp.net> <lar at mwtcorp.net> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:04:17 -0700
> Andrew Dul <andrew.dul at quark.net> wrote:
>
> The problem described below appears to be more related to the current
> 3-month window for additional allocations, not necessarily the
> utilization metric.  The 3-month window has had a number of
> side-effects, some of which were not anticipated when that policy was
> put in place.  With run-out in the region approaching rapidly we need to
> turn our attention to the longer term policies which will support the
> desires of the community (as best possible) through the transfer market
> or other mechanisms.  Changing the utilization formula (for those
> requests which do require a formal needs assessment) may be part of the
> policy changes which are needed.
>
> Some of the problem of the formula are long standing.  If your last
> allocation
> was a /22 and you have a larger customer come to you with a legitimate and
> clear need for a /22 or /21 you have no way of getting it no matter what %
> utilization
> is in the policy. It has always seemed to me, that "need" should have a lot
> more to
> do with what you are going to do with the requested allocation, and what is
> available
> in your current allocations, than some arbitrary utilization percentage. The
> problem is that ARIN would then have to get into network design arguments.
>
>
> Actually, I believe that this circumstance is the reason that the immediate
> needs clause
> exists.
>
> 4.2.1.6. Immediate need
>
> If an ISP has an immediate need for address space, and can provide
> justification to show that the address space will be utilized within 30 days
> of the request, ARIN may issue a block of address space, not larger than a
> /16 nor smaller than ARIN's customary minimum allocation, to that
> organization. These cases are exceptional.
>
> Perhaps, in practice, since it is located in principles (not sure how or why
> that occurred), and there isn't anything concrete stating that it should be
> treated as an exception to 4.2.4.1, it does not get implemented as I believe
> was intended. Staff would have to clarify that. If that is the case, it
> would be a relatively simple proposal to fix:
>
> Amend section 4.2.4 by adding:
> 4.2.4.5 Exceptional Cases of Immediate Need
> If a subscriber member has a customer who needs a larger block than remains
> in the subscriber member's
> free pool, then a request under section 4.2.1.6 shall apply as an exception
> to the requirements in 4.2.4.1.
>
> The argument that just removing the needs test for smaller allocations
> entirely
> has some merit. The problem seems to be in defining what is small. A
> compromise of /20 has
> been suggested and I think it's reasonable. Even though I support needs
> testing I can support removing it at a /20 and smaller.
>
>
> I really think that removing the needs test is unlikely to gain consensus,
> even at the smaller point. There is clear resistance in the community to
> this idea and I expect that opposition will remain strong.
>
> If people support the idea above, I'm happy to put it into a policy template
> and get it started in the process. If there is strong support, it can
> probably be moved through the process fairly quickly.
>
> Owen
>
>
> Larry Ash
>
> Andrew
> On 6/24/2014 1:08 PM, Steven Ryerse wrote:
>
> This is the problem I'm trying to solve and why I've been so vocal about it.
> Steven Ryerse
> President
> 100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338
> 770.656.1460 - Cell
> 770.399.9099- Office
>
> ℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
>                     Conquering Complex Networks℠
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> Behalf Of Tim Gimmel
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 4:04 PM
> To: arin-ppml at arin.net List
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Policy discussion - Method of
> calculatingutilization ARIN-2014-17
>
>
> The problem is that the current process has disenfranchised smaller
> companies who are somewhat frequently requesting space under the 3 month
> need projection and are ending up with many /22's, /21's etc instead of the
> /20 or /19 that would have been possible prior to austerity measures.
> To make matters worse, it does not seem that such companies are
> substantially represented on PPML so it is creating an illusion that the
> policy is not necessary or would not be supported by the community at large
> (outside of PPML).
>
> This is exactly what is happening, for example I have 4 /20's and a /19 from
> earlier days, but now I have 7 /21's and that is the most I will ever be
> able to request.  We are using every possible way to keep IPv4 usage down.
>
> --Tim
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
>
> Larry Ash
> Network Administrator
> Mountain West Telephone
> 123 W 1st St.
> Casper, WY 82601
> Office 307 233-8387
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

-- 
Jeffrey A. Lyon, CISSP-ISSMP
Fellow, Black Lotus Communications
mobile: (757) 304-0668 | gtalk: jeffrey.lyon at gmail.com | skype: blacklotus.net