[arin-ppml] Team Review - policy matter? (was: Re: reverse COE statement)

[Jason Schiller]

Owen,

I was surprised that transfer are approved on a two year future looking
business case that is not necessarily supported by a current 1 year
utilization that is half as large.  This is the reason for my starting the
thread "ARIN-2014-20 and current future looking needs assessment"

Like you, it seemed to me that IPv4 transfers are subject to the same
policies as IPv4 free pool allocations (and I would expect assignments as
well).

I am not sure this necessarily needs to be the case.  For example I don't
think transfer requests need to be processed in series.  With depletion
occurring, and heightened concern for efficient utilization I would think
team review would be desirable for transfers.

I am however less concerned about team review of transfers than I am of
having a direct allocations limited to 25% of the previous year's run rate,
and transfers not limited to 200% of the previous year's run rate.

___Jason


On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>
> On Sep 24, 2014, at 10:23 AM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 24, 2014, at 1:15 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> >>> Team review is not called for in policy;
> >>
> >> I completely disagree. There are a number of reasons that the community
> tied 8.3 transfers to "current IPv4 policy" and other than the timeframe
> exemption specifically granted in 8.3, I believe that fairness dictates
> that ARIN should treat transfers in an identical manner to free pool
> allocations and assignments.
> >
> > Owen -
> >
> > If you feel that transfers should be subject to team review (despite
> > the fact that they do not draw from the ARIN region IPv4 free pool) and
> > consider it to be a policy matter, I would recommend the submission of
> > a policy proposal which introduces the concept of "team review" for
> > requests to the Number Resource Policy Manual.  It presently is not
> > contained therein.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > /John
> >
> > John Curran
> > President and CEO
> > ARIN
> >
>
> I disagree. While it is not specifically called out, the simple fact is
> that 8.3 transfer policy specifically states that IPv4 transfers should be
> subject to the same policies as IPv4 free pool allocations. It does make an
> exception for the "speculation timeframe" allowed in the request, but
> otherwise I believe that the community's expectation is that they are
> treated the same and subject to the same policies and limitations.
>
> How do other members of the community feel about this?
>
> Owen
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140924/9953f0ba/attachment.htm>