[arin-ppml] Thoughts on 2015-7

Azinger, Marla Marla.Azinger at FTR.com
Mon Oct 5 15:50:44 EDT 2015


I’ve seen it from all sizes.  I don’t see an issue.  If a large quantity of people stand up and say they struggle.  I’ll be surprised.  And the assumption its easier for larger entities than smaller is very off base.  I’ve managed a variety of entity sizes and there are different variables at all levels that really create a level playing field.

And not everyone has the same contracts.  I’ve seen a variety and in those varieties there can also be contingencies.

That said, if the majority of people stand up and say it’s too difficult.  Then so be it.

Regards
Marla Azinger


From: Scott Leibrand [mailto:scottleibrand at gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 12:29 PM
To: Azinger, Marla <Marla.Azinger at FTR.com>
Cc: Rob Seastrom <rs-lists at seastrom.com>; ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Thoughts on 2015-7

Reducing the burden on ARIN staff is not part of the problem statement for this proposal (though it might be a side effect, depending on how they implement it).  The main goal here is to reduce the administrative burden on organizations who need to acquire IPv4 space via transfer.  That burden may actually be higher for smaller entities who don't have experience with and processes in place for jumping through ARIN's hoops.

I don't think this policy would have much impact on the ability of large well-funded entities to purchase as much address space as they like.  Currently, those organizations simply write a contract that gives them full rights to the address space they're buying, and allows them to transfer the space with ARIN whenever they are ready to put it into use on their network (or can otherwise pass ARIN's needs justification tests).

-Scott


On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Azinger, Marla <Marla.Azinger at ftr.com<mailto:Marla.Azinger at ftr.com>> wrote:
Does ARIN staff feel this is needed to support how they asses transfers?

Right now I don't support this proposal.   Based on experience I don't see a problem.

Additionally this could have a side effect of letting larger money endowed entities to purchase more address space faster and deplete the chances smaller entities had on the market.  This would shorten the life span of the v4 market.

Regards
Marla Azinger

-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>] On Behalf Of Rob Seastrom
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2015 12:46 PM
To: ppml at arin.net<mailto:ppml at arin.net>
Subject: [arin-ppml] Thoughts on 2015-7

Dear Colleagues,

It's been almost two months since ARIN 2015-7 was submitted.  Anyone have thoughts on "Simplified requirements for demonstrated need for IPv4 transfers"?

The AC would love your input.

Draft policy text follows:

Draft Policy ARIN-2015-7
Simplified requirements for demonstrated need for IPv4 transfers

Date: 23 June 2015

Problem statement:

ARIN transfer policy currently inherits all its demonstrated need requirements for IPv4 transfers from NRPM sections 4. Because that section was written primarily to deal with free pool allocations, it is much more complicated than is really necessary for transfers. In practice, ARIN staff applies much more lenient needs assessment to section 8 IPv4 transfer requests than to free pool requests, as 24-month needs are much more difficult to assess to the same level of detail.

This proposal seeks to dramatically simplify the needs assessment process for 8.3 transfers, while still allowing organizations with corner-case requirements to apply under existing policy if necessary.

Policy statement:

8.1.x Simplified requirements for demonstrated need for IPv4 transfers

IPv4 transfer recipients must demonstrate (and an officer of the requesting organization must attest) that they will use at least 50% of their aggregate IPv4 addresses (including the requested resources) on an operational network within 24 months.

Organizations that do not meet the simplified criteria above may instead demonstrate the need for number resources using the criteria in section
4 of the NRPM.

Comments:

a. Timetable for implementation: Immediate

b. Anything else




_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto: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<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.
________________________________

This communication is confidential. Frontier only sends and receives email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.frontier.com/email_disclaimer.
_______________________________________________
PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto: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<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20151005/1de1378e/attachment.html>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list