[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-17: Change Utilization Requirements from last-allocation to total-aggregate

Elvis Velea elvis at velea.eu
Tue Jun 10 16:27:51 EDT 2014

Hi Andrew,

after an other read of the policy proposal, I now understand that 
removal of demonstrated need from policy would be a secondary effect. 
You were actually trying to reduce the load on the ARIN Registration 
Department's work and reduce approval time.

I am wondering if ARIN RS staff could actually produce some statistics 
showing how work-loaded they are (these may already be available online, 
but I don't know how to get to them).

Something in the lines of:
- for the tree sizes discussed here: /24, /20 and /16 + total
     - number of requests per month
     - average time until initial response
     - average number of mails sent in the request by ARIN staff
     - average time needed for approval
     - number of requested sizes that were reduced and by how much

We could then form an opinion on how much would this proposal impact on 
one side, the organisations that make the requests, and on the other 
side, ARIN staff.
Off course, removing the DN from small requests may create more workload 
for ARIN as number of transfer requests will increase :)


On 10/06/14 01:13, Andrew Dul wrote:
> Hello,
> Thank you to those of you who were able to participate at the PPC last
> week at NANOG.  Below are some thoughts based on the feedback I heard.
> I heard some support for this policy with the caveat that this policy
> would allow some organizations to apply for address space sooner.  Some
> postulated that the downside to this policy would be short and likely
> small for the remainder of the free pool, but it would also make it
> easier to qualify for transfer space sooner on the transfer market.
> I heard that this policy shouldn't impact organizations which currently
> use the MDN 4.5 policies and that the current MDN policy does not have
> the same issue as it uses a 80% per site metric to meet utilization
> requirements.
> The other issue which is related to this draft that I heard at the PPC
> was that ARIN in the past year or so updated its operational practice to
> more closely follow the current policy of " efficiently utilized all
> previous allocations" ( and this is also making harder for some
> organizations to meet utilization guidelines at the time of request for
> additional space.  Do other organizations also believe the new
> operational practice is an issue and the policy should be changed?
> As I stated at the PPC, so far I've seen a little support for this and
> some opposition for this proposal, but at this point not enough to move
> it forward to a recommended policy based on the current feedback.  If
> you support this policy, please post your support to the mailing-list
> otherwise as the policy shepherd I will likely be recommending that the
> AC abandon this draft at a future AC meeting.
> Thanks for your input,
> Andrew
> On 5/16/2014 1:21 PM, ARIN wrote:
>> ## * ##
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2014-17
>> Change Utilization Requirements from last-allocation to total-aggregate
>> Date: 16 May 2014
>> Problem Statement:
>> Utilization requirements for new requests is being calculated on a per
>> allocation basis rather than in aggregate. For example, if an
>> organization has 4 x /22 and 3 of them are utilized 100% and the
>> fourth utilized at 75%, that request would be denied. This is a bit
>> out of balance as an organization with a single /20 utilized at 80%
>> would have less efficient utilization but would be eligible to request
>> additional space.
>> Policy statement:
>> Section Change text to read: "ISPs must have efficiently
>> utilized all previous allocations, in aggregate, to at least 80% in
>> order to receive additional space. This includes all space reassigned
>> to their customers. Please note that until your prior utilization is
>> verified to meet the 80% requirement, ARIN can neither process nor
>> approve a request for additional addresses."
>> Section Change text to read: "End-users must have efficiently
>> utilized all previous assignments, in aggregate, to at least 80% in
>> order to receive additional space, and must provide ARIN with
>> utilization details. The prefix size for an additional assignment is
>> determined by applying the policies found in Section 4.3 of the NRPM."
>> Comments:
>> a. Timetable for implementation: Immediate, possibly through board
>> action.
>> b. Per originator, This does not currently extend into MDN (aka
>> 4.5.4), and I'm not really sure how to reconcile it against 4.5.5, but
>> OP expressed some concern that there may be undue restrictions there.
>> It might be better served by a separate proposal.
>> c. There should probably also be an attempt to clean up the language
>> between and, as they're both currently very clunky.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list