[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2014-20: Transfer Policy Slow Start and Simplified Needs Verification

[Jason Schiller]

Bill,

Thank you.

The intent was NOT to remove the requirement for in-region recipients of
transfers to sign an RSA.

My apologies.

There is a lot or parallel structure in 8.3 and 8.4 and in my mind 8.4 is
identical to 8.3 except 8.4 has a clause "Except when the recipient is out
of region then that region's policy applies", and " Except when the source is
out of region then that region's policy applies".  I really wanted to
completely merge 8.3 and 8.4 to remove the parallel structure but as an
editorial re-write only and not part of this discussion.

in 8.4 there are a separate bullets for 24-month supply and sign the RSA:
"> Recipients within the ARIN region will be subject to current ARIN
policies and sign an RSA for the resources being received.
 > Recipients within the ARIN region must demonstrate the need for up to a
24-month supply of IPv4 address space."

I think in my mind I imagined a similar separate bullets in 8.3, one for
24-month supply and another for sign RSA, and I intended just to remove the
24 month part.

I think there are a few ways to fix this.

Option 1 - minimun rewrtite
- remove only the "24-month" portion of the 8.3 text. This is the minimum
change, but brings section 8.3 and 8.4 further out of alignment

Option 2 - single bullet for "meet ARIN policy" and "sign RSA" (8.3 as the
model text)
- replace the whole "24-month" text and "meet ARIN policy" text in 8.3 with
a bullet that included "sign the RSA" and "meet ARIN policy" under one
bullet and is parallel to text in 8.4 (minus within the ARIN region)

Option 3 - two separate bullets for "meet ARIN policy" and "sign RSA" (8.2
as the model text)
- replace the whole "24-month" text in 8.3 with a bullet that included
"sign the RSA"
-separate the "sign the RSA" and "meet ARIN policy" in 8.4 into two bullets
and is parallel to text in 8.3 (plus the within ARIN region)

(If the summary of the options are hard to follow I have a suggestion for
the specific rewrites below)

I think your suggestion is roughly Option 2 below (the only difference is
with your suggested rewrite, there are now two bullets in 8.3 stating the
recipient is subject to current ARIN policies).  Assuming all the options
have the same policy implications, I would prefer option 2 or 3, as these
bring greater alignment of the sections.

Do these options all meet your concern?

Does the community and ARIN staff agree that the thee options have the same
policy implications?


Kevin, David,

I think at this point you own the text?
I would be supportive of the friendly amendment to modify the draft policy
as follows:


OPTION 1:
Replace the following Section 8.3 text:

 "> 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."

 with:

"> Recipients will sign an RSA for the resources being received."


OPTION 2:

 Replace the following Section 8.3 text:

 "> 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.
  > The resources transferred will be subject to current ARIN policies."

 with:

"> Recipients will be subject to current ARIN policies and sign an RSA for
the resources being received."

OPTION 3:
Replace the following Section 8.3 text:

 "> 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."

 with:

"> Recipients will sign an RSA for the resources being received."

and replace the following Section 8.4 text:

"> Recipients within the ARIN region will be subject to current ARIN
policies and sign an RSA for the resources being received.
  > Recipients within the ARIN region must demonstrate the need for up to a
24-month supply of IPv4 address space."

With:

"> Recipients within the ARIN region will sign an RSA for the resources
being received.
 > The resources transferred to recipients within the ARIN region will be
subject to current ARIN policies."

If all the options are indeed the same I would prefer option 2 or 3.
If the options have different policy implications and we can converge on
one standard for both 8.2 and 8.3, then I would prefer that.


___Jason











On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Bill Owens <owens at nysernet.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 04:55:58PM -0400, ARIN wrote:
> > On 28 August 2014 the ARIN Advisory Council (AC) accepted
> > "ARIN-prop-212 Transfer policy slow start and simplified needs
> > verification" as a Draft Policy.
> >
> . . .
> >
> > Draft Policy ARIN-2014-20
> > Transfer Policy Slow Start and Simplified Needs Verification
> >
> > Date: 3 September 2014
> >
> . . .
> >
> > Policy statement:
> >
> > Remove the following section 8.3 text:
> >
> > "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."
>
> Shouldn't that be something like this, instead?
>
>  Replace the following Section 8.3 text:
>
>  "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."
>
>  with:
>
>  "The recipient will be subject to current ARIN policies and sign an
>   RSA for the resources being received."
>
> As written it appears to remove the requirement for recipients of
> in-region transfers to sign an RSA.
>
> Bill.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>



-- 
_______________________________________________________
Jason Schiller|NetOps|jschiller at google.com|571-266-0006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20140904/e5bc91dc/attachment.htm>